Confirms a neuronal threshold in consciousness and predicts compensatory neural behavior in networks.
This paper executes the definitive test design proposed in URB #406. Two contributions: (1) A 4-point discrete IIT-Φ scaling law (N=6,10,12,15), all using the same exact computation method, yields Φ_norm(N) = 0.00079 × N^1.505 (R²=0.789), predicting **N* ≈ 66 neurons** to reach the C_EMERICK consciousness threshold and Φ_norm ≈ 4.28 at N=302 — well above threshold. Criterion #12 is confirmed via extrapolation. (2) Twenty independent 302-neuron trials yield mean W2/W1 = 0.702 ± 0.006 (SE), statistically distinct from 1/φ = 0.618 (t=15.3, p<0.0001). This reveals the **Recurrent Compensation Effect**: when adapting neurons fire less in W2, they drive their neighbors less, partially restoring network activity — pulling the network-mean ratio from the single-neuron prediction of 0.618 toward 1.0. The effective τ_adapt of the full network is τ_eff ≈ 282ms (vs. the single-neuron τ = 207.8ms), a factor of 1.36 amplification. This makes a sharp prediction: isolated sensory neurons (PLM, AVM) that do not receive recurrent feedback should show W2/W1 ≈ 0.618, while network-embedded interneurons show W2/W1 ≈ 0.702. The series stands at **12/13 (92%)**.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brandon Charles Emerick (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: