The Universal & Atomic Elements of Organization
A falsifiable scientific theory proposing that the same irreducible structures organize both thought and reality — from the quantum to the social scale.
O-Theory proposes that four irreducible structures — Distinctions, Systems, Relationships and Perspectives (DSRP) — form the universal grammar of organization. Rather than being merely useful ways of thinking, these structures are hypothesized to be the atomic elements from which every organized phenomenon emerges, whether in cognition, biology, physics, mathematics, society, or the cosmos.
| D | S | R | P |
| Distinctions | Systems | Relationships | Perspectives |
| Identity ↔ Other | Part ↔ Whole | Action ↔ Reaction | Point ↔ View |
| D := (i ↔ o) | S := (p ↔ w) | R := (a ↔ r) | P := (ṗ ↔ v) |
This is a living scientific evidence compendium: an open, continually evolving collection of independent empirical research, formal theory, mathematical proofs, cross-disciplinary analyses, applications, critiques, and proposed falsifications. Every entry is included because it supports, refines, challenges, or attempts to falsify the theory.
Scientific theories are strengthened not only by evidence that confirms their predictions, but also by surviving attempts to falsify them. This compendium brings both together: independent evidence from researchers who were not testing DSRP and proposed counterexamples evaluated against the formal theory.
One counterexample is enough to falsify O-Theory. Until then, the question remains: do the same four structures organize everything from quantum systems to human thought?
Independent convergence is one of the strongest forms of scientific evidence because researchers arrive at the same conclusion while investigating different questions for different reasons.
The number is not the point. Researchers in different fields, studying different questions with different methods, repeatedly arrived at the same structural predictions—almost always without testing DSRP or using its language.
Try a different term or clear the filters.
This compendium began as the peer-reviewed literature review “A Literature Review of the Universal and Atomic Elements of Complex Cognition,” published in the Journal of Systems Thinking with 109 studies. That paper is the peer-reviewed foundation. What you see here is its living, continuously updated version . New studies are checked before they are added, and the collection now holds and keeps growing. Open any card to see what the researchers found, why it bears on DSRP, and where the original review discusses it, the fuller account.
The collection is updated continuously, so the citation carries the date you consulted it rather than a study count — the count changes weekly, and putting it in the reference would make the same collection look like a different work to everyone who cites it. To cite a single claim or study, use its own address: every one has a permanent link.
This is the adversarial half of the compendium. Where the evidence track asks what converges on DSRP, this one asks what would end it: a single organized phenomenon whose structure needs a fifth pattern, a ninth element, or a fifth structural dynamic. It holds written up from candidates across territories, and resolutions — the general answers those cases settle against. Every case is published whether it held or failed, including the ones still open.
Cite this rather than the evidence collection when the point is what survived attack. The two are separate works with separate addresses: one asks what converges on the theory, the other asks what would end it, and a reference to the first does not support a claim about the second. Case and resolution numbers change when the record is revised, so cite a case by its own permanent link rather than by number.
This collection is meant to keep growing. Send us a study, paper, book or critique that bears on DSRP, whether it supports the theory or cuts against it, and we will read it and decide whether it belongs.
Authors Theves et al.
Year 2021
Publisher The Journal of Neuroscience
Discipline Neuroscience
Read it at the publisher 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0657-21.2021
A key aspect of conceptual knowledge is that it can be flexibly applied at different levels of abstraction, implying a hierarchical organization. It is yet unclear how this hierarchical structure is acquired and represented in the brain. Here we investigate the computations underlying the acquisition and representation of the hierarchical structure of conceptual knowledge in the hippocampal-prefrontal system of 32 human participants (22 females). We assessed the hierarchical nature of learning during a novel tree-like categorization task via computational model comparisons. The winning model allowed to extract and quantify estimates for accumulation and updating of hierarchical compared with single-feature-based concepts from behavior. We find that mPFC tracks accumulation of hierarchical conceptual knowledge over time, and mPFC and hippocampus both support trial-to-trial updating. As a function of those learning parameters, mPFC and hippocampus further show connectivity changes to rostro-lateral PFC, which ultimately represented the hierarchical structure of the concept in the final stages of learning. Our results suggest that mPFC and hippocampus support the integration of accumulated evidence and instantaneous updates into hierarchical concept representations in rostro-lateral PFC. <b>SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT</b> A hallmark of human cognition is the flexible use of conceptual knowledge at different levels of abstraction, ranging from a coarse category level to a fine-grained subcategory level. While previous work probed the representational geometry of long-term category knowledge, it is unclear how this hierarchical structure inherent to conceptual knowledge is acquired and represented. By combining a novel hierarchical concept learning task with computational modeling of categorization behavior and concurrent fMRI, we differentiate the roles of key concept learning regions in hippocampus and PFC in learning computations and the representation of a hierarchical category structure.
To identify how humans learn and neurally represent multi-level nested conceptual hierarchies.
As people learned tree-structured nested categories, modeling showed genuinely hierarchical learning; mPFC tracked accumulated knowledge, hippocampus/mPFC coded updates, and rostrolateral PFC stored the final nested structure.
Concepts are organized as nested part–whole hierarchies (a whole can be a part of a larger whole).
The mind builds nested part–whole (superordinate/subordinate) category structures, and distinct brain regions accumulate, update, and store this hierarchy. Purpose: To identify how humans learn and neurally represent multi-level nested conceptual hierarchies. Finding: As people learned tree-structured nested categories, modeling showed genuinely hierarchical learning; mPFC tracked accumulated knowledge, hippocampus/mPFC coded updates, and rostrolateral PFC stored the final nested structure. [Added 2026-07-30 as new evidence beyond the original 109; DSRP structural basis: S axiom (Recursive Role): a whole can itself be a part of a larger whole — the paper directly demonstrates nested, recursive part–whole structure.]
Patterns it shows S
Added 2026-07-30
How to cite this Theves et al. (2021). Learning and Representation of Hierarchical Concepts in Hippocampus and Prefrontal Cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience.