I35e. Does Science Need a Unit of Viability?

Contemporary sciences employ numerous constructs for describing the preservation, disturbance, degradation, and recovery of systems, including reliability, lifetime, survival, maintainability, recoverability, resilience, state of health, and viability [3–8]. Quantitative resilience metrics, generic resilience metrics based on viability analysis, and empirically validated multidimensional viability constructs already exist [4,8]. Consequently, any proposal for a distinct measure of viability must be explicitly differentiated from this prior work. This paper investigates viability through the relationship between a system's initial state, disturbance, recovery dynamics, and the outcome of a subsequent functional cycle. A candidate construct termed Inter-Cycle Recovery Information (ICRI) is introduced to represent the incremental information contained in a system's recovery response about a subsequent functional outcome after established predictors have been accounted for. The paper distinguishes the directly observed Recovery Response R(Δt), surrogate recovery-derived features, the experimental candidate metric RRS-V, ICRI, and the broader construct of viability V. Three testable hypotheses are formulated: H1, distinct measurability; H2, cross-domain structural comparability; and H3, metrological insufficiency of existing representations. A sequential evaluation framework is proposed comprising an Incremental Information Test, a Metrological Novelty Gate, a Necessary-Measure Test, a Unit Necessity Test, and an SI Necessity Gate. The framework explicitly allows multiple outcomes: no distinct measure, sufficiency of existing metrics, a quantity of dimension one, a derived quantity, a multidimensional Viability Profile, or — under substantially stronger evidence — a dedicated unit. The central proposition is therefore methodological: the need for a standardized measure or unit of viability should be treated as a falsifiable outcome of empirical and metrological investigation rather than as an assumption of Vitology.