Living Evidence Compendium

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.

What if the same structures that organize your thoughts also organize the world? Explore the hypothesis

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.

DS RP
DistinctionsSystemsRelationshipsPerspectives
Identity ↔ OtherPart ↔ Whole Action ↔ ReactionPoint ↔ 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?

Try a demonstration yourself Why is this convergent evidence compelling? See why independent convergence is one of science’s strongest forms of evidence.

independent opportunities for the theory to fail.

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.

Discipline
Field

No studies match your search

Try a different term or clear the filters.

About this collection

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.

Cabrera, D., Cabrera, L., & Cabrera, E. A Literature Review of the Universal and Atomic Elements of Complex Cognition. Journal of Systems Thinking. · Cornell University & Cabrera Research Lab.

How to cite this collection

APA
BibTeX

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.

About this record

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.

How to cite the counterexamples and resolutions

APA
BibTeX

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.

Know of work that belongs here?

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.

 

DSRP Evidence

Small-scale, intensive predator control benefits small- but not large-bodied skinks

Details

Authors Marieke Lettink, Christine McClure, Phil Crutchley, Dave Kelly

Year 2026

Publisher New Zealand Journal of Ecology

Kind of work article

Discipline Ecology

Secondary disciplines Public Policy

Read it at the publisher 10.20417/nzjecol.50.3643

In authors' words

Abstract

Aotearoa | New Zealand's endemic terrestrial fauna is threatened by invasive mammalian predators. Significant resources are invested controlling a subset of mammalian predators (primarily stoats, brushtail possums, and rats) to protect birds on the New Zealand mainland, including those invested in the national Predator Free 2050 (PF2050) strategy (now also including feral cats). Yet to date, there is scant evidence that predator trapping benefits mainland lizard (skink and gecko) populations, which generally require higher levels of predator suppression, including of mice. We conducted a 10-year study on three sympatric skink species to assess their responses to small-scale (< 10 ha), intensive predator control that included mouse suppression on the Port Hills, Canterbury. We found that: (1) annual counts of two small skink species (southern grass skink [Oligosoma chionochloescens] and McCann's skink [Oligosoma maccanni]) increased significantly while the larger and rarer Canterbury spotted skink (Oligosoma lineoocellatum) declined to near-zero; and (2) proportionally more weasels (Mustela nivalis) were trapped than stoats (Mustela erminea) in all but the first year, with > 300 weasels trapped in total. Contrasting responses of small- versus large-bodied skink species may reflect differences in life history and refuge use. Small (≤ 15 ha), full mammal-exclusion (predator-proof) fences may be the only effective means for in-situ protection of mainland spotted skink populations. Interactions among multiple predator species, difficulty in suppressing mice, and lack of non-treatment sites make potential adverse effects of predator trapping (e.g. meso-predator release of mice, competitor release of weasels) difficult to detect. We suggest that, without adequate control tools for weasels and mice, PF2050 and other, similar control programmes will worsen ecological outcomes for indigenous lizards.

What they set out to do (purpose)

To evaluate whether small-scale, intensive predator control (including mouse suppression) benefits mainland populations of three sympatric skink species in Canterbury, New Zealand.

Who or what was studied (sample)

Three sympatric skink species — southern grass skink (Oligosoma chionochloescens), McCann's skink (O. maccanni), and Canterbury spotted skink (O. lineoocellatum) — monitored on the Port Hills, Canterbury.

How they did it (methods)

A 10-year study of annual skink counts on small-scale (<10 ha) sites under intensive predator control (targeting stoats, weasels, rats, possums, and mice), comparing trends of small- versus large-bodied skink species alongside records of predator catch composition.

What they found (results)

Ten years of intensive, small-scale predator control (including mouse suppression) significantly increased counts of the two small-bodied skink species but the larger Canterbury spotted skink declined to near zero, coinciding with weasels outnumbering stoats in traps.

Commentary

In short

Whether an animal counts as small-bodied or large-bodied (a Distinction, D) determines the sign of the causal effect (a Relationship, R) that the identical predator-control intervention has on its population.

Patterns it shows D, R

Shows it makes a difference

Added 2026-09-16

How to cite this Marieke Lettink, Christine McClure, Phil Crutchley, Dave Kelly (2026). Small-scale, intensive predator control benefits small- but not large-bodied skinks. New Zealand Journal of Ecology.