I35b. A9DDC — Universal Integrated Nine-Component Architectural and Spatial-Chronal Audit of Scientific Constructs

Similarity between scientific texts, terms, or individual concepts is not sufficient to establish the identity, equivalence, provenance, or scientific novelty of theories and models. Identical terms may have different definitions; different terms may designate similar concepts; similar concepts may be organized into different theoretical structures; structural correspondence does not establish common provenance; and correspondence observed at an initial state may disappear when system scale, temporal horizon, or feedback return is taken into account. This paper proposes A9DDC, a candidate Universal Integrated Nine-Component Architectural and Spatial-Chronal Audit of Scientific Constructs. Its architecture is represented as: T–C–S–P | E–Sp–Tm–F–O. The method distinguishes nine analytical components: terminology, concepts, structure, provenance, evidential support, spatial or system scale, temporal horizon, feedback, and subsequent state or outcome. Rather than reducing comparison to a single similarity percentage, the result is represented as a Nine-Component Scientific Correspondence Profile Π₉(A,B). A scientific novelty audit identified established predecessor traditions for individual components of the method, including conceptual analysis, theoretical equivalence, provenance analysis, evidence grading, dynamical equivalence, bisimulation, system-boundary analysis, and comparative theory assessment. Accordingly, the individual components of A9DDC are not claimed as independently novel. Within the literature search conducted for this study, no previously published method was identified that reproduces the complete integrated nine-component architecture of A9DDC. The candidate scientific novelty therefore concerns the specific integration of known and partially related analytical components into a single sequential procedure and the hypothesis that this integration provides additional discriminatory capacity. A program for independent validation and comparative testing of the method against narrower approaches is proposed. Keywords: scientific theories; scientific models; theory comparison; scientific novelty; theoretical equivalence; provenance; evidential support; architectural comparison; spatial-chronal analysis; feedback; A9DDC; Vitology.