Start here
One idea underneath, two separate projects. The idea: abstract things are real things, and a real thing can be checked. The projects check different objects — one checks what a text does to a reader, the other checks what a machine claims. They do not share a method and they are not stages of each other.
You have five minutes. Try something first; read the arguments after.
One · ten minutes
The quick test
An instrument that measures what a text does to the person reading it — whether it organises them or disorients them, whether it moves them closer to the world or further from it. Two ratios decide; the size of the move does not.
- The measuring bench — interactive →
Three distributions, two ratios, one point on the plane. Nothing leaves the page. - The essay it comes from → (in Italian)
What it concludes. Which tools were used to write something — any tools, models included — is a coefficient in the equation, never a load-bearing term. What carries the value is observation, selection and recombination, and those stay with the author.
Two · the interesting part
Lab · Post-cognition
Validating what a machine claims
A different object and a different method: an external, auditable procedure that fixes what kind of claim is on the table before asking whether it is true. Ontology precedes epistemology. The project itself now publishes on two lines, one ontological and one empirical, which advance at different speeds.
- Project status →
A living page: the current figures, the two lines and the state of each, and the five things that are not settled. - The coding manual: how it is applied by hand →
- What counts as one paper →
A control on a second model broke the extractor, and the reason it broke turned out to be an argument the empirical paper could not carry. Kept in the log rather than quietly fixed.
Three · the other half
The editorial work
Twenty years inside publishing. Not the argument for either project — the reason both have something at stake.
Four · plainly
What is in English
The research is written in English because its readers are. The essays are written in Italian because their subject is.
In English: the closed working paper and its back matter, the whole research log, the measuring bench, this page and the About page — and the two papers that continue the programme will be in English as well. In Italian: the essays, the curated links, the concept index and the map of the site. That is the shape of the project, not a gap in it — the two languages are doing different work, and the Italian archive is not a translation waiting to happen.