Standardization of Viability Indicators: A Unified Operational and Normalization Framework for Interdisciplinary Vitology

This article develops a unified operational and normalization framework for viability indicators within Vitology. It continues the metrological sequence established in G27–G34 and responds directly to the limitations identified during the first interdisciplinary pilot test, which demonstrated the portability of the general viability architecture while also revealing substantial differences in the nature, scale, quality, and interpretability of domain-specific indicators. The article distinguishes four levels of the measurement architecture: Observable Variable (OV), Raw Viability Indicator (RVI), Standardized Viability Indicator (SVI), and Composite Viability Construct (CVC). This distinction is intended to prevent primary observations, normalized indicators, and theoretically aggregated constructs from being treated as if they were equivalent. A Viability Indicator Passport (VIP) is introduced as a mandatory metadata structure for standardized indicators. It includes the definition of the measurand, unit of observation, data source, scale type, direction of interpretation, transformation formula, reference range, temporal window, uncertainty, missing-data procedure, comparability status, quality flag, aggregation permission, limitations, and version. Three principal indicator-direction classes are proposed: Positive-Direction Indicator (PDI), Negative-Direction Indicator (NDI), and Optimal-Range Indicator (ORI). Basic normalization rules to the interval [0,1] are developed while explicitly rejecting the assumption that one transformation formula can be applied mechanically to all types of variables. The article further introduces Reference Anchoring (RA), Normalization Provenance (NP), Indicator Uncertainty Profile (IUP), Measurement Quality Flag (MQF), Indicator Comparability Class (ICC), Aggregation Transparency Rule (ATR), Non-Compensation Constraint (NCC), Indicator Version Control (IVC), Viability Indicator Admission Standard (VIAS), and Viability Measurement Chain (VMC). Particular attention is given to measurement uncertainty, data quality, temporal scale, changing system boundaries, missing data, outliers, and the problem of compensatory aggregation, in which high values of one function can conceal critically low values of another. G35 therefore maintains that a composite index should not automatically replace the multidimensional viability profile. The proposed framework is not presented as an established international metrological standard. It is formulated as an internal methodological standard of the Vitology research program intended for subsequent empirical testing, revision, independent replication, and comparison with established disciplinary measurement systems. Keywords: Vitology; viability; metrology; viability indicators; standardization; normalization; measurement uncertainty; operationalization; multidimensional profile; composite indicators; CVI; CVP; CVT; interdisciplinarity; reproducibility.