Toward a Metrology of Viability Boundary Dynamics: Operationalization, Measurement, and Reproducible Testing of VBDP

This article develops the candidate Theory of Viability Boundary Dynamics proposed in G17 and formulates the metrological stage required for its reproducible testing. G16 addressed the question: Where can the system remain viable? G17 then asked: How does the system move relative to the viability boundary, and can approaching loss of viability be detected in advance? G18 asks the next necessary question: How can position, motion, recovery, feedback, and reserve be measured so that the resulting observations can be independently tested, compared, reproduced, and prospectively evaluated? The external metrological foundation of G18 includes the International Vocabulary of Metrology, VIM; the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, GUM; and related JCGM documents concerning measurement models and conformity assessment (JCGM, 2008; JCGM, 2012a; JCGM, 2012b; JCGM, 2020). G18 proposes a metrological architecture for the following components: M_V - Viability Margin; A_B - Viability Boundary Approach Rate; T_R and RDP - Recovery Time and Recovery Dynamics Profile; FEP - Feedback Effectiveness Profile; R_rob - Dynamic Robustness Reserve; R_reg - Regenerative Reserve; R_ad - Adaptive Reserve. The article develops the working constructs Viability Boundary Dynamics Measurement Specification, VBDMS; Standardized Perturbation Protocol, SPP; VBDP Uncertainty Profile, VUP; Boundary Decision Interval, BDI; Prospective Viability Boundary Dynamics Test, PVBDT; and VBDP Reproducibility Matrix, VRM. Version 2 additionally positions G18 relative to established research on complexly organized dynamical systems. Autonomous, anticipatory, adaptive, reorganizing, and self-organizing behavior has an extensive scientific history and cannot be treated as a novel contribution of Vitology merely because such properties are incorporated into a viability-oriented framework (Collier & Hooker, 1999). G18 therefore introduces the protective distinction: Theoretical Description of a Complex Dynamic Property is not the same as Metrological Operationalization of That Property. The central methodological distinctions are: Theoretical Determinacy is not the same as Metrological Determinacy. Measurability is not the same as Validity. Validity is not the same as Predictive Added Value. Predictive Added Value does not automatically imply Decision Added Value. The scientific status of VBDP can increase only if its components are independently operationalized, measurement uncertainty is evaluated, results are reproducible, prospective performance is demonstrated on new data, and the multidimensional profile provides robust added information beyond adequate disciplinary baseline models. Keywords: Vitology; viability; metrology; viability domain; viability boundary dynamics; VBDP; measurand; operationalization; measurement uncertainty; metrological traceability; repeatability; reproducibility; recovery; feedback; reserve; standardized perturbation; prospective testing; predictive diagnostics; baseline model; complex dynamical systems; adaptive systems; self-organization; Predictive Added Value; Decision Added Value.