MDPE.21:6 - Sources and Epistemic Boundaries
| Source or practice line | Contribution used here | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
C.36 — Cultural Evolution and Cultural-Evolution Engineering | General separation of local intervention from distributed generation, transmission, recognition, selection, retention, and loss. | It does not supply the Music-and-Dance architecture, direct domain Methods, cases, or representative tests. |
| Music-and-Dance eco-evo-devo synthesis (unpublished source note) | Music-and-Dance eco-evo-devo synthesis; developmental machinery, ecology, recognition, selection, memory, conflicts, and candidate new-whole tests. | The intake provides hypotheses and cases, not a universal ontology, measured prevalence, or proof that one architecture works. |
| Vanchurin et al., Toward a theory of evolution as multilevel learning | A model source for learning-like dynamics across scales and downward effects. | The cultural and engineering transfer remains a working hypothesis; it does not prescribe a project Method. |
| Mauch et al., The evolution of popular music: USA 1960–2010 | An empirical example of feature change and large-scale musical-style analysis. | Recorded-pop measurements do not establish the production, teaching, performance, recognition, or retention architecture of every music practice. |
| Urban Dance Camp | A live example of travelling workshop and video-mediated dance infrastructure. | Provider materials establish neither a new cultural whole nor the causal effect of the network. |
| Holly Herndon and Mat Dryhurst, The Call, Serpentine | A joined choir, model, dataset, recording, exhibition, and participation case. | The project source does not establish a general AI-music Method or durable cultural uptake. |
Use only the architecture concerns that change the current choice or test. Reconsider the architecture decision when a Music-or-Dance field Method supplies a better way to design and test the same reproduction change.