Toward the Relational Formulation of Biological Thermodynamics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Classical thermodynamics employs the state of thermodynamic equilibrium, characterized by maximal disorder of the constituent particles, as the reference frame from which the Second Law is formulated and the definition of entropy is derived. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics analyzes the fluxes of matter and energy that are generated in the course of the general tendency to achieve equilibrium. The systems described by classical and non-equilibrium thermodynamics may be heuristically useful within certain limits, but epistemologically, they have fundamental problems in the application to autopoietic living systems. We discuss here the paradigm defined as a relational biological thermodynamics. The standard to which this refers relates to the biological function operating within the context of particular environment and not to the abstract state of thermodynamic equilibrium. This is defined as the stable non-equilibrium state, following Ervin Bauer. Similar to physics, where abandoning the absolute space-time resulted in the application of non-Euclidean geometry, relational biological thermodynamics leads to revealing the basic iterative structures that are formed as a consequence of the search for an optimal coordinate system by living organisms to maintain stable non-equilibrium. Through this search, the developing system achieves the condition of maximization of its power via synergistic effects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it