This framework identifies conditions for source-starved compression in cognition, indicating implications for public information integrity.
This paper gives a regime-neutral account of a specific failure mode in public cognition: source-starved compression chains can preserve coordination while losing the capacity to correct their own distortions. The argument starts from finite cognitive capacity, a task-relative source-complexity scope condition, non-neutral compression objectives, and the data-processing inequality. Its central distinction is between source-injecting error-correction, denoted M5s, and coherence-only error-correction, denoted M5c. Coherence checks can improve consistency, decoding, and usability below an information ceiling; only source access can lift that ceiling. Mutual information and task-relative fidelity are kept distinct: the former bounds what a downstream layer can recover, while the latter describes which retained information survives selection. The empirical layer is separated into five numbered premises: P1, fidelity-decoupled or fidelity-adverse selection; P2, counterfeitable provenance cues; P3, channel-specific calibration lag; P4, maintenance-cost asymmetry; and P5, effective chain collapse. The paper does not rank regime types, does not claim that contemporary publics are always chains, and does not offer a predictive model of collapse. It identifies the conditions under which public inputs become source-starved enough for the chain model to apply, and it specifies where the framework can be empirically broken.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rajendra Wadje (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: