Methodological Ontological Demarcation of the Line-Cutting Test: A Cross-Paradigm Acceptance Tool and Its Distinction from Legacy Methodologies

Abstract The Line-Cutting Test, as the core diagnostic instrument of Huzhi Grammar, differs fundamentally in its object of operation and decision criterion from mainstream methods in causal inference, machine learning, and social science. This paper provides an independent methodological demarcation of the Line-Cutting Test. Through systematic comparison with causal graphs (Pearl, 2009), ablation experiments, counterfactual decomposition, relational ontology philosophy, graph-theoretic edge removal and percolation theory, this paper argues that most mainstream analytical methods outside the relational-sociology and network-science traditions default to the premise of independently existing entities, conducting local optimization inside existing paradigms. By contrast, the Line-Cutting Test operates on the load-bearing lines of axioms, institutions, and civilizational narratives, producing a binary verdict of structural collapse or survival at its own operational level. The uniqueness of this tool lies not in its ontological premise alone—which it shares with the relational sociology tradition (Emirbayer, 1997; White, 2008)—but in the elevation of its operational object to the axiomatic and narrative levels, a scope at which no existing method defines load-bearing lines. Its operationalization deploys a six-step screening protocol from the main framework as a prerequisite procedure (YU, 2026, §4.3). The task of this paper is demarcation; the full specification of the line-cutting operation is given in the main framework. Keywords: Line-Cutting Test; Huzhi Grammar; ontological demarcation; cross-paradigm acceptance; relational sociology; causal inference