MDPE.20:8 - Rationale and Source Use
The current FPF supplies rival-hypothesis construction, dynamics and causal-use discipline, evidence, measurement, temporal limits, next-action choice, and the general cultural relations of generation, transmission, recognition, selection, retention, loss, mediation, and deliberate influence. MDPE.20 adds the Music-and-Dance mechanisms, structures, performers, scenes, evidence, probes, interventions, and consequences that change an actual development decision.
| Source or maintained result | Use here | Limit |
|---|---|---|
Current FPF B.5, B.5.2, A.3.3, C.28, A.15.7, C.11, A.10, C.16, C.27, C.29, and C.36 | Rival hypotheses, actual dynamics and causal-use claims, next action and bounded choice, evidence, measurement, time, mathematical representations, and cultural relations. | Do not supply the domain trajectories, structures, observations, probes, intervention choices, or consequences. |
| Buskell, What are cultural attractors? | Separates transformation tendency, cluster point, increasing frequency, and equilibrium uses of attractor. | The word attractor or one regularity does not identify a mechanism or future. |
| Acerbi et al., Cultural selection and biased transformation: two dynamics of cultural evolution | Shows why selective transmission and biased transformation can fit similar observations. | Similar distributions do not establish one process. |
| Deffner et al., Bridging theory and data: A computational workflow for cultural evolution | Supplies a specialist theory-to-data Method with generative assumptions, estimands, synthetic validation, and empirical comparison. | The complete research Method is not mandatory for every first-use practitioner forecast. |
| Jacoby et al., Cross-cultural comparison of rhythm priors in 15 countries, and Ravignani et al., Musical evolution in the lab exhibits rhythmic universals | Supply iterated-reproduction evidence for structured, population-sensitive rhythmic reconstruction. | Laboratory reconstruction is not the whole historical or social selection process. |
| Spiech et al., 4/4 and more | Shows in the reported experiments that groove responses to complexity depend on meter familiarity, supporting an encultured predictive-perception hypothesis. | Does not provide a universal interest curve or future style trajectory. |
| Toussaint, The Geometry of Musical Rhythm, 2nd ed. (2020), especially chapters 8, 17–18, 36, and 39–42 | Supplies rhythm representations, metrics, transformations, similarity, complexity, genealogical hypotheses, and transmission cases. | The constructions do not constitute a universal rhythm ontology or causal theory of cultural attractors. |
| Heald, Lengyel, and Wolpert, Contextual inference underlies the learning of sensorimotor repertoires | Supplies a testable human sensorimotor model of context-sensitive creation, expression, and updating of multiple motor memories. | Wider Music, Dance, cognition, robot, AI, and cultural use remains a rival-bearing hypothesis. |
| Marjieh et al., Characterizing the Interaction of Cultural Evolution Mechanisms in Experimental Social Networks | In controlled singing networks, topology differences diminished when selection or reproduction bias was removed; use the result to construct and update rival trajectories involving topology, selection, and reproduction together. | The source population and Work are controlled melody choice and singing, not a universal cultural law, a Dance scene, or evidence that the same interaction governs another population. |
Use source editions and case conditions that can change the current trajectories, observation, or decision. A newer or more popular model does not displace a better-grounded local hypothesis by status alone.