DFT Source Discipline

Scientific Bibliography

This bibliography maps external mathematical, scientific, and technical references to the DFT pages and formalization targets they support. It distinguishes established references from DFT-specific claims, interpretations, and implementation hypotheses.

Citation Health Review Path Submit Source / Citation Review

Citation Boundary

External references are used to orient the mathematical, scientific, or technical background of DFT. They do not imply endorsement, peer-review acceptance of DFT, certification, deployment validation, or proof completion. DFT-specific claims remain authorial, formalization-target, implementation-candidate, or external-review-needed unless independently documented.

Review Boundary

Digital Fabrica Theory is presented as an authorial framework and formalization program. Public review tracks identify what must be formalized, simulated, implemented, or independently reviewed before stronger claims can be made. The presence of a review path does not mean peer review has been completed.

Reference	Domain	Status	Used For	Boundary
Ramanujan Graphs Alexander Lubotzky, Ralph Phillips, Peter Sarnak · 1988	graph-theory	established reference	spectral expansion background robust sparse topology inspiration routing and partition-resilience formalization support	Established graph-theoretic reference. DFT-specific security or routing claims require separate modeling, simulation, and review.
On the Number of Primes Less Than a Given Magnitude Bernhard Riemann · 1859	number-theory	historical foundation	zeta-function background Euler-product relation context zeta-indexed economic model inspiration	Historical mathematical foundation. DFT economic use is a research extension, not a validated financial mechanism.
On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems Kurt Gödel · 1931	logic	historical foundation	logical incompleteness boundary formal-system limitation framing review discipline and proof-status caution	Foundational logic reference. It supports claim-boundary discipline; it does not validate DFT as complete.
On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem Alan Turing · 1936	logic	historical foundation	computability limits execution and decidability framing formalization target boundaries	Foundational computability reference. DFT runtime claims require explicit computational model and implementation evidence.
Topological Invariants of Knots and Links James W. Alexander · 1928	knot-theory	historical foundation	knot invariant background policy-equivalence formalization support governance mutation analogy	Established knot-theory reference. DFT policy encoding remains an authorial formalization target until the encoding is defined and reviewed.
The Fractal Geometry of Nature Benoit B. Mandelbrot · 1982	fractal-geometry	historical foundation	fractal scaling intuition recursive architecture language subnetwork growth formalization support	Foundational fractal-geometry reference. DFT scalability claims remain conditional on formal assumptions and implementation tests.
Post-Quantum Cryptography Standardization National Institute of Standards and Technology	standards	standard or guideline	post-quantum security context cryptographic review path security boundary language	Public standardization context. DFT may be described as post-quantum-aligned only where implementation choices are specified; certification is not implied.
Equilibrium Points in N-Person Games John F. Nash · 1950	game-theory	historical foundation	strategic-agent modeling virtual organization equilibrium framing governance and coordination analysis	Game-theory foundation. DFT governance or market claims require explicit payoff models, simulations, and review.
Industry 4.0: State of the Art and Future Trends Li Da Xu, Eric L. Xu, Ling Li · 2018	industry-4	contemporary research	Industry 4.0 context IoT / cloud / AI integration framing applied-fabric implementation context	Industry 4.0 context source. DFT implementation claims still require reference artifacts and pilot evidence.

Review Discipline

Reference Review Path

These review tracks identify what would strengthen, weaken, or revise DFT claims. They are designed to make the framework testable, challengeable, and externally reviewable.

Simulation neededgraph-theory

Spectral Expansion / Ramanujan Routing Review

Which DFT routing, robustness, or partition-resilience claims follow from expander graph properties, and which require separate empirical simulation?

Would Strengthen

Explicit graph family and routing model
Adversarial partition model
Simulation under node/link failure
Separation of graph robustness from cryptographic security

Would Weaken

Equating spectral expansion with cryptographic security
No adversarial model
No implementation topology
Overclaiming quantum-security from graph properties alone

Boundary: External graph theory supports topology design; DFT-specific network claims require modeled evidence.