Correction — 28 August 2026. The D1 codes in the paragraph below are wrong, and the coverage claim overstates by one category. The deposited corpus is not affected: Archivio 31 Validazioni v4 and the paper both carry the correct codes, and the error is confined to this note.
Of the six codes cited, one is right and five are not. Historical is D1.1, correctly. But statistical-probabilistic is not a category at all — the nearest is D1.2, Empirical-Quantitative, and D1.6 is Interpretive-Hermeneutic. Normative is D1.8, not D1.7, which is Aesthetic-Evaluative. Predictive claims are handled under D1.4, not D1.8. Analytic claims fall under D1.3 and D1.4, not D1.9, which is Procedural-Instructional. Metaphysical-Ontological is D1.14 alone; D1.10 is Prescriptive-Policy. The corpus covers ten of the eleven active categories, not eleven: D1.9 has no claim in it, and the paper now says so.
One claim is also misquoted. The consciousness claim reads, in the executed corpus and in the deposited materials, “La coscienza non è riducibile a processi neurali” — not reducible to neural processes, which is narrower than irreducible to matter and is the wording anyone recoding the blind packet will find.
Current figures and open questions: Project status.
Before running the quantitative experiment, the taxonomy needed to demonstrate that it could handle the full range of claim types — not just the three selected for replication. The horizontal validation corpus does exactly this.
Thirty-one claims were selected and validated, covering ten of the eleven active D1 categories: historical-factual (D1.1), empirical-quantitative (D1.2), logical-formal (D1.3), mathematical-analytic (D1.4), phenomenological-subjective (D1.5), interpretive-hermeneutic (D1.6), aesthetic-evaluative (D1.7), ethical-normative (D1.8), prescriptive-policy (D1.10) and metaphysical-ontological (D1.14). Procedural-instructional claims, D1.9, are not represented. The corpus includes claims that are unambiguously false (“Vaccines cause autism”), claims that are framework-dependent (“Vegetarianism is ethically superior”), claims that are analytically true (“A triangle has three sides”), and claims that are in principle undecidable (“Consciousness is not reducible to neural processes”).
The corpus is not a sample — it is a proof of coverage. Its function is to demonstrate that the taxonomy handles the full ontological range without category collapse or forced misclassification.
Each validation follows the locked format: PRE-STEP 0 → PROSPETTO (six rows: Ontologia / Logica / Decidibilità / Esito / Pre-Step 0 / Sintesi rapida) → [EMPATIA] → [LOGICA] → [INFORMAZIONE] → [EPISTEMIC RESPONSIBILITY CHECK] → [SINTESI ESTESA] → FONTI.
Document: archivio_31_validazioni_v4.pdf — February 2026. 31 claims, 11 D1 categories.
Code assigned retrospectively on 23 August 2026, when the notation was introduced: a declared reconstruction, not a real-time record.
The formal apparatus of this note was built in dialogue with a language model and verified line by line. The verification is the part that counts: no step was accepted on the strength of the output’s apparent authority.