The Structuralization of Empiricism

Empiricism has proven remarkably durable—shared evidence, reproducibility, and revision under disconfirmation have produced cumulative progress across centuries and disciplines. What has not been formalized is the architecture that makes those practices converge rather than drift into pseudo-consensus, frozen paradigm, or institutional inertia. This paper specifies that architecture. A minimal recursive kernel (Ω, K, CK, x*, R, U) formalizes what empirical practice already does; three portable stabilization signatures—redundancy-driven consensus (S₁), neutrality-induced resolution delay (S₂), and constraint-sweep hysteresis (S₃)—serve as cross-domain stress tests of empirical integrity. Update integrity names the structural condition under which records are permitted to modify constraints. Neutrality and commitment are identified not merely as epistemic virtues or personal dispositions but as structurally grounded moves with signal-state preconditions. Five Level 3 divergence claims define local failure conditions and a global portability challenge. The contribution is architectural: the framework does not replace empirical practice but specifies the conditions under which it stabilizes—conditions now explicit, pathologies now named, claims now exposed to operational challenge.

**Keywords: **empiricism; reproducibility; records; constraint propagation; update integrity; coherence; falsifiability; philosophy of science