


%Excellent --- this is exactly the right instinct. You're not just
%publishing a paper --- you're proposing to \emph{reformulate the
%conceptual taxonomy of AI}, which will draw both \textbf{methodological
%and political} scrutiny.

%Below is a \textbf{multi-stage verification and readiness procedure} you
%can adopt before public release, whether for arXiv, ACM, or journal
%submission. It combines academic rigor, reproducibility standards, and
%domain-specific validation for the ``taxonomy-proposal'' genre.
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{amsmath,amsthm,mathtools}
\usepackage[a4paper,margin=1in]{geometry}
%\usepackage{times}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{newtxtext,newtxmath}   % unified serif + math fonts
\usepackage{microtype}             % optional quality
%(If you switch to LuaLaTeX/XeLaTeX later, instead use
%\usepackage{fontspec}\setmainfont{TeX Gyre Termes}

\usepackage{natbib}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{doi}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{arrows.meta,positioning,fit,calc}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\usepgfplotslibrary{polar}


\usepackage{color}
\colorlet{shadecolor}{orange!15}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{RGB}{243,243,243}

% Shaded block (Pandoc-style)
\newenvironment{Shaded}{\begin{snugshade}}{\end{snugshade}}

% Highlighting as a true verbatim env (no trailing-token issues)
\DefineVerbatimEnvironment{Highlighting}{Verbatim}{commandchars=\\\{\}}


\makeatletter
\@for\tok:=NormalTok,ExtensionTok,KeywordTok,StringTok,CommentTok,FunctionTok\do{%
  \expandafter\providecommand\csname \tok\endcsname[1]{##1}%
}
\makeatother


\newcommand{\Lrn}{\textbf{Lrn}}   % Learnon — Parametric learning
\newcommand{\Evo}{\textbf{Evo}}   % Evolon — Population adaptation
\newcommand{\Sym}{\textbf{Sym}}   % Symbion — Symbolic inference
\newcommand{\Prb}{\textbf{Prb}}   % Probion — Probabilistic inference
\newcommand{\Sch}{\textbf{Sch}}   % Scholon — Search & planning
\newcommand{\Ctl}{\textbf{Ctl}}   % Controlon — Control & estimation
\newcommand{\Swm}{\textbf{Swm}}   % Swarmon — Collective/swarm
\newcommand{\hyb}[1]{\textsc{#1}} % hybrid spec styling (e.g., \hyb{Lrn+Sch})


% Toggles and figure sizes (larger for readability)
% Toggles and figure sizes (larger for readability)
\newif\iftwocol
\twocolfalse
\newcommand{\figureW}{0.95\textwidth}
\newcommand{\figureH}{0.62\textwidth}



\begin{document}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{structural-and-citation-integrity-checks}{%
\subsection{🧩 1. Structural and Citation Integrity
Checks}\label{structural-and-citation-integrity-checks}}

\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
Goal\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Verification Action\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
Tool / Method\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{All citations present}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Parse \texttt{.aux} or \texttt{.log} for ``Citation undefined''
warnings.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
\texttt{latexmk\ -bibtex} and
\texttt{grep\ \textquotesingle{}Citation\textquotesingle{}\ main.log}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{BibTeX completeness}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Validate every \texttt{\textbackslash{}cite\{key\}} has a matching
\texttt{@entry} with fields \texttt{author}, \texttt{title},
\texttt{year}, \texttt{source}.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
\texttt{bibtool\ -s\ -d\ -r\ check.rsc\ references.bib}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Citation relevance}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Manually verify that each cited source supports the statement. This
includes: (1) standards mentioned in Related Work; (2) foundational
theoretical citations in mathematical sections; (3) classic AI
exemplars.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
Reading verification checklist (see below)\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Self-consistency}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Check that each reference to a class (\Lrn, \Evo, \ldots) matches the
definitions and equations in §3--5.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
Full-text search for ``Lrn'', ``Evo'', etc.\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Cross-referencing}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Confirm all figures/tables/sections compile without ``??''.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
\texttt{latexmk} warnings summary\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.08\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{DOI and URL validation}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.67\columnwidth}\raggedright
Run a link checker or Python script (e.g., \texttt{requests.head()}) to
verify DOIs/URLs resolve.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.15\columnwidth}\raggedright
\texttt{bibtex-tidy\ -\/-check-urls\ references.bib}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\emph{Checklist for manual relevance verification} For each citation:

\begin{enumerate}
\def\labelenumi{\arabic{enumi}.}
%\tightlist
\item
  Read the cited paragraph and the cited source's abstract.
\item
  Confirm it is \textbf{supporting evidence}, not merely tangential.
\item
  If a reference covers multiple claims, annotate page/section numbers
  (e.g., \texttt{\textbackslash{}citep{[}§2{]}\{ISO23053\}}).
\end{enumerate}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{conceptual-and-taxonomic-soundness-review}{%
\subsection{🧭 2. Conceptual and Taxonomic Soundness
Review}\label{conceptual-and-taxonomic-soundness-review}}

\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.14\columnwidth}\raggedright
Aspect\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.58\columnwidth}\raggedright
Verification Task\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.20\columnwidth}\raggedright
Reviewer Type\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.14\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Completeness of mechanism coverage}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.58\columnwidth}\raggedright
Verify that every major AI approach (symbolic, probabilistic,
connectionist, evolutionary, control, swarm, search/planning) maps
cleanly to exactly one OPT root.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.20\columnwidth}\raggedright
Independent AI domain experts (1 per subfield)\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.14\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Hybrid expressiveness}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.58\columnwidth}\raggedright
Test that real systems (e.g., AlphaZero, Neuroevolution, LQR-RL) can be
expressed without ambiguity.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.20\columnwidth}\raggedright
Practicing researchers; maybe small hackathon trial\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.14\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Biological correspondence}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.58\columnwidth}\raggedright
Check that cited biological analogs (plasticity, selection, control,
etc.) are correctly represented and not overstated.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.20\columnwidth}\raggedright
Cognitive science / computational neuroscience reviewer\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.14\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Orthogonality of attributes}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.58\columnwidth}\raggedright
Validate that secondary descriptors (Rep, Obj, Time, etc.) are indeed
orthogonal to mechanism choice.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.20\columnwidth}\raggedright
Systems or ML pipeline specialists\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.14\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Cross-domain coherence}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.58\columnwidth}\raggedright
Ensure that terms like ``learning'', ``adaptation'', and ``control'' are
used consistently across sections.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.20\columnwidth}\raggedright
Technical editor\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{technical-and-mathematical-verification}{%
\subsection{🔍 3. Technical and Mathematical
Verification}\label{technical-and-mathematical-verification}}

\begin{enumerate}
\def\labelenumi{\arabic{enumi}.}
\item
  \textbf{Equation sanity check}

  \begin{itemize}
  %\tightlist
  \item
    Verify every equation's notation is defined in context.
  \item
    Units and symbols consistent (e.g., (V), (J), (\theta),
    (p(z\textbar x))).
  \item
    Biological analogs correctly mapped to canonical forms (e.g., Hebb's
    rule → Oja normalization).
  \end{itemize}
\item
  \textbf{Graphical inspection}

  \begin{itemize}
  %\tightlist
  \item
    TikZ/PGF figures render cleanly; legends match table abbreviations.
  \item
    Radar plot axes correspond to the six orthogonal attributes
    described.
  \end{itemize}
\item
  \textbf{Reproducible build}

  \begin{itemize}
  %\tightlist
  \item
    \texttt{latexmk\ -pdf} or the Makefile runs without intervention.
  \item
    No proprietary fonts, deprecated packages, or local includes.
  \end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{terminological-and-semantic-validation}{%
\subsection{🧱 4. Terminological and Semantic
Validation}\label{terminological-and-semantic-validation}}

Because this paper introduces new terms (Lernon, Evolon, etc.), perform:

\begin{enumerate}
\def\labelenumi{\arabic{enumi}.}
%\tightlist

\item
  \textbf{Cross-linguistic sanity check} --- verify none of the coined
  names have misleading or offensive meanings in major languages
  (English, French, German, Japanese, Chinese).
\item
  \textbf{Search collision audit} --- check that ``Lernon'', ``Evolon'',
  etc. are not registered trademarks, commercial products, or prior AI
  system names.
\item
  \textbf{Ontology compatibility} --- test mapping to existing
  ontologies (e.g., ISO/IEC 22989 concept hierarchy, Wikidata entries).
\item
  \textbf{Glossary consistency} --- confirm that the definitions in the
  paper, appendix, and metadata (e.g., JSON schema) match exactly.
\end{enumerate}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{external-critical-review-red-team}{%
\subsection{🧪 5. External Critical Review (``Red
Team'')}\label{external-critical-review-red-team}}

To pre-empt ``easy takedowns,'' convene a small red-team review:

\begin{longtable}[]{@{}ll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.30\columnwidth}\raggedright
Reviewer Type\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.64\columnwidth}\raggedright
What to Challenge\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Symbolic AI veteran}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.64\columnwidth}\raggedright
``Does OPT misrepresent classical expert systems?''\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Evolutionary computation expert}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.64\columnwidth}\raggedright
``Is \Evo~really separable from \Swm?''\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Control theorist}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.64\columnwidth}\raggedright
``Does \Ctl~belong as a distinct root or as applied
optimization?''\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Probabilistic modeller}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.64\columnwidth}\raggedright
``Is \Prb~too coarse --- should inference and generative modelling
split?''\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Policy/standards liaison}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.64\columnwidth}\raggedright
``Can regulators or ISO easily map this taxonomy onto existing
frameworks?''\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

Collect objections and prepare written responses (as supplementary
material if needed).

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{metadata-and-interoperability-testing}{%
\subsection{🧩 6. Metadata and Interoperability
Testing}\label{metadata-and-interoperability-testing}}

\begin{itemize}
\item
  Validate the JSON Schema for OPT-Code with a few sample systems.
  Example validation command:

\begin{Shaded}[]
\begin{Highlighting}
  ajv validate -s opt -schema.json -d samples/*.json
\end{Highlighting}
\end{Shaded}
\item
  Ensure round-trip integrity: parsing a valid OPT string and
  re-rendering it should be idempotent.
\item
  Confirm metadata examples (e.g., \texttt{OPT=Evo/Lrn+Ctl}) match
  systems described in tables.
\end{itemize}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{publication-communication-readiness}{%
\subsection{🧾 7. Publication \& Communication
Readiness}\label{publication-communication-readiness}}

\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.16\columnwidth}\raggedright
Area\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.51\columnwidth}\raggedright
Check\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright
Why\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.16\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Title and Abstract}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.51\columnwidth}\raggedright
Emphasize mechanism-based taxonomy, not policy; avoid ``redefining AI''
hyperbole.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright
Avoid overreach criticisms.\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.16\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Introduction framing}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.51\columnwidth}\raggedright
Cite regulatory motivation (EU AI Act, NIST, ISO), but frame OPT as
complementary.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright
Appears cooperative, not adversarial.\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.16\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Data availability statement}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.51\columnwidth}\raggedright
Clarify no datasets, only conceptual and standards synthesis.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright
Meets arXiv/ACM policies.\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.16\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Reproducibility}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.51\columnwidth}\raggedright
Provide Makefile and instructions to regenerate all figures from
TeX.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright
Fulfills open science norms.\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.16\columnwidth}\raggedright
\textbf{Accessibility}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.51\columnwidth}\raggedright
Verify large-font, high-contrast figures; ensure color palettes
differentiate well in grayscale.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright
Required for ACM/IEEE accessibility standards.\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{pre-submission-peer-simulation}{%
\subsection{🔬 8. Pre-submission Peer
Simulation}\label{pre-submission-peer-simulation}}

\begin{itemize}
\item
  Use an \textbf{LLM-based referee simulator} or colleagues to generate
  expected reviewer comments.

  \begin{itemize}
  %\tightlist
  \item
    ``Compare to ISO/IEC 23053.''
  \item
    ``Explain why control/swarm deserve separate roots.''
  \item
    ``Provide examples of OPT adoption in practice.''
  \item
    Prepare point-by-point responses.
  \end{itemize}
\item
  Draft a short ``Author Response Template'' for actual peer review.
\end{itemize}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

\hypertarget{final-publication-readiness-checklist-summary}{%
\subsection{✅ 9. Final ``Publication-Readiness'' Checklist
(summary)}\label{final-publication-readiness-checklist-summary}}

\begin{longtable}[]{@{}ll@{}}
\toprule
Category & Status\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
Citations verified (exist + relevant) & ☐\tabularnewline
All equations defined and correct & ☐\tabularnewline
Figures render without warning & ☐\tabularnewline
JSON schema validates OPT strings & ☐\tabularnewline
Naming checked for collisions & ☐\tabularnewline
Red-team review completed & ☐\tabularnewline
Accessibility (font/contrast) & ☐\tabularnewline
Build reproducibility (Makefile OK) & ☐\tabularnewline
Cover letter frames contribution as complementary, not adversarial &
☐\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\begin{center}\rule{0.5\linewidth}{0.5pt}\end{center}

If you'd like, I can produce a \textbf{ready-to-run Python script} that
automatically checks citations (parsing \texttt{.aux} and
\texttt{.bib}), verifies DOI/URL validity, and outputs a short
``completeness report'' for your paper. Would you like that next?

\end{document}
