While machine learning and symbolic regression increasingly propose candidate equations and surrogate simulators from physical data, a fundamental epistemological gap remains: statistical data fitting does not equate to the discovery of a physical law, nor does adding a soft physics penalty to a loss function guarantee simulation correctness, stability, or out-of-distribution (OOD) validity. In this paper, we establish Certified AI Physics Discovery and Autonomous Experimentation (CAIPD), a deductive methodology and mathematical framework anchored in our 71-page ZFC Master Reference Monograph (Lee, 2026, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23486681) [1] and vertically integrating the Causal Operator Learning System (COLS, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23556758) [2], Self-Verifying Knowledge Evolution Systems (SVKES, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23557138) [3], the High-Dimensional Geometric Probability System (HDGPS, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23557360) [4], the Dynamic Topological Critical Transition System (DTCTS, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23557507) [5], and the Extended Quantum Information Geometry System (EQIGS, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23557698) [6]. Governed by the universal quadruple 𝔘 = (𝒯_0x8A2C, 𝐂_UPTC, η_friction, ϵ_SHID), we formulate six core axioms (CAIPD-1 through CAIPD-6) and prove six fundamental theorems: (1) Curvature-Filtered Rejection of Spurious Statistical Correlations (d_stat ≠ d_geo) and Sample-Complexity Acceleration (∝ 1/κ_eff); (2) Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Verifiable Physics Simulation combining exact UROA conservation (ℬ_ϵ), functional do-calculus, and rigorous convergence-error bounds; (3) Information-Optimal Autonomous Experiment Selection via Pareto Counterexample Falsification (O(ln(m/δ)/κ_eff) budget scaling); (4) Lifetime Statistical Safety (≤ α_global) and Tarski–Löb Stratified Immunity against self-referential corruption of physical principles; (5) Chaotic Trajectory vs. Topological Invariant Predictability Horizon Separation; and (6) Counterfactual Inverse Design of Metamaterials and Multi-Experiment Precision Constant Verification. Complete Python numerical verification is provided in Appendix A.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seonggil Lee (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: