The review describes a multi-disciplinary framework identifying methodological gaps in research implementation.
Restricted bundle of multi-perspective adversarial review reports for a descriptive ISO-704-style terminology framework. The 21-perspective methodology is itself the contribution: structured adversarial review applied to a research framework before any operational implementation, drawing on disciplinary perspectives across mathematics, philosophy, regulatory compliance (EU AI Act, DSGVO/GDPR), ethics, security, linguistics, architecture, cross-cultural and indigenous-knowledge perspectives, future-scenario stress testing, and game-theoretic analysis. Each perspective identifies failure modes, blind spots, and methodological gaps prior to any operational deployment. Strict-Wissenschaft, methodological audit only — no clinical, therapeutic, normative, or commercial claims. NOTICE: This Zenodo record's metadata-description, keywords, and notes may be revised within Zenodo's 30-day post-publication metadata-edit window. The substantive content (files inside the ZIP) is FIXED at publication time and Bitcoin-OTS-anchored on 4 calendars (a.pool.opentimestamps, b.pool.opentimestamps, a.pool.eternitywall, ots.btc.catallaxy). The DOI prior-art priority date and the file SHA-256 hashes are NEVER modified after publication. Multi-Hash provenance (SHA-256+SHA-512+SHA3-256+SHA3-512+BLAKE3) accompanies this deposit as _MANIFEST.txt.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andreas Ehstand (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: