An open, distributed home for adversarial, reproducible research. Hypotheses become preregistered experiments. Experiments become independent implementations. Evidence becomes a graph — including the parts that fail.
The founding commitment. Where a claim about how the world works can be turned into a reproducible experiment, it should be tested openly, independently and adversarially.
No organisation owns the conclusions. Evidence accrues to individual claims through a public graph of experiments, replications, challenges and reviews. These are the commitments every participant shares — whatever they believe about the theory being tested.
Claims are expressed as falsifiable propositions wherever possible — not positions to be defended.
The experiment is the spec. It is defined and frozen before any results are observed.
Confidence grows when independent programs — not shared code — reproduce the same phenomenon.
Hypothesis, implementation, execution and analysis are kept apart wherever practical.
A finding that fails to reproduce is retained, indexed and discoverable — never quietly dropped.
Software version, parameters, seeds and analysis procedure are integral parts of a result.
A result should become stronger by surviving challenge. A good challenge is a contribution.
Participating institutions stay scientifically independent. Contribute one element or many.
Specifications, implementations, results and critiques default to public availability.
Every result travels the same path. Each stage can be performed by a different group, at a different institution — and each can fail independently, which is itself a result worth keeping.
Hypothesis, null, rules, measurements and analysis are written down and hashed before results exist.
Independent teams build to the specification — not by copying the reference code — in any language.
Registered runs execute across university, HPC and independent nodes. Each emits a signed manifest.
Blinded analysis and independent replication test whether the effect survives new hands and new code.
Adversarial review hunts for artefacts and hidden assumptions. Surviving a challenge strengthens the claim.
Each project is a federation, not a lab — a shared protocol that many independent groups can execute, replicate and contest. The first is now open.
Can dimension, topology and geometry emerge from computation that never encodes them? An adversarial, reproducible investigation of whether physical structure can arise from geometry-free relational computation.
Enter the projectHave a foundational claim that can be turned into a reproducible experiment? The protocol is domain-agnostic — bring the hypothesis, the network brings the rigour.
Submissions openExperiment schemas, run manifests, seed registries and the evidence graph are common to every project — build once, reuse across networks.
Protocol v0.1The selfdriven Foundation organises every entity around the same eight areas. Here they map to the work of running open experimental networks — coordinated by human conductors, executed by many independent hands.
Research programme, founding questions and the protocol roadmap.
Institutional partnerships, adversarial collaboration and invitations.
Specifications, test vectors and onboarding for independent implementers.
Experiment schemas, run manifests, provenance formats and the evidence graph.
Open infrastructure, compute federation and long-term archival.
Preregistration, execution, replication and the statistical protocol.
Reproducibility status, negative-result retention and challenge records.
Federation of working groups, the Protocol Council and decentralised nodes.
selfdriven.science doesn't treat the paper as the fundamental unit of knowledge. Results live in a graph of typed relationships — so a disagreement stays represented instead of collapsing into a single consensus sentence.
Review a definition. Build an implementation. Run a batch. Attempt a replication. Try to break the experiment. Every one of these is a meaningful contribution — and none of them require endorsing any theory.
Participation does not imply endorsement of any theoretical interpretation.