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 Lucas Gelape, Fernando Meireles, Marta Mendes da Rocha, Guilherme de Abreu Duque
Year 2026
Publisher Journal of Politics in Latin America
Kind of work article
Discipline Political Science
Secondary disciplines Media & Communication
Applied false
Read it at the publisher 10.1177/1866802X261445940
It is common, both in unitary and federal countries, for politicians at different levels to cooperate in pursuit of mutual benefits. But how can we identify who cooperates with whom to investigate the factors behind these alliances? This article proposes a novel strategy to detect alliances between local executive leaders and national legislators using mayors' social media data. Drawing on over two million posts from nearly 2000 Brazilian mayors, we develop, through a supervised machine learning model, an indicator that measures the strength of mayor-congressperson relationships. Our findings show that most connections are relatively weak, though partisanship is positively associated with stronger ties. Our approach offers a low-cost, replicable alternative to traditional methods for studying political intermediation. It advances the understanding of multilevel political dynamics in presidential systems with strong local executives and highlights the role of local elected officials as key, yet often overlooked, brokers in comparative politics.
To develop a method for identifying and measuring the strength of cooperative alliances between local executive leaders (mayors) and national legislators.
Over two million Facebook and Instagram posts (2018-2022) from nearly 2,000 Brazilian mayors, representing 36.5% of mayors elected in 2020.
Supervised machine learning classification of social media posts for brokerage activity, combined into a relationship-strength indicator based on concentration, temporal longevity, and relevance of mentions, validated against election results, campaign spending, and interviews.
Machine-learning analysis of over two million social media posts from nearly 2,000 Brazilian mayors found that most mayor-legislator relationships were weak, while shared party affiliation increased relationship strength by about 13 points (0.7 standard deviations), with geographic proximity showing a comparable effect and smaller municipalities forming stronger alliances than larger ones.
The findings describe a relational structure—brokerage ties between local and national levels of a political system—whose strength varies systematically with partisan and geographic factors.
Patterns it shows S, R
Added 2026-09-19
How to cite this Lucas Gelape, Fernando Meireles, Marta Mendes da Rocha, Guilherme de Abreu Duque (2026). Multilevel Political Connections and Interest Intermediation: Identifying Political Alliances with Social Media Data. Journal of Politics in Latin America.