Preprint

The DOI matches its DataCite record; its reference list is not available.

From Form to Program: Medium-Range Conditional Codon Syntax Inside Real Genes (Preprint, Pipeline v13 & Results)

Logvinovich Victor, Perez, Jean claude·2026·Zenodo

Abstract

This repository contains the preprint of the paper "From Form to Program" and the full source code for the autonomous audit of conditional codon syntax (pipeline v13). Building upon the "Form/Substance" lens introduced by J.-C. Perez, this study mathematically separates the static macroscopic invariants of the genome (form: codon populations, fractals, mirror symmetry) from the dynamic, program-like sequential order inside real coding sequences (substance/program). Key Features & Scientific Contributions: Broad Phylogenetic Scope: Analyzes real true-frame CDS sequences from 13 RefSeq taxa, spanning mammals, a vertebrate bridge (zebrafish, chicken), an insect, a plant, a nematode, a fungus, two bacteria, and two archaea. Strict Null-Model Ladder (H0–H7): The empirical codon-bigram model is tested against an unprecedented hierarchy of nulls, including amino-acid syntax with codon-pair bias (H2b), nucleotide trigrams (H3b), and local block-shuffle (H4). Codon-Mirror-Symmetry Control (H7): Introduces a novel shuffle model that strictly preserves the exact static populations of the 32 Watson-Crick reverse-complement codon pairs (the first symmetry axis of Perez, 2013) while destroying sequential order. All 13 species successfully pass this control, proving that dynamic conditional syntax is orthogonal to static mirror symmetry. Two-Scale Cross-Species Transfer: Coarse Scale: Recovers a broad, symmetric vertebrate-level conserved grammatical layer across human, chimp, mouse, zebrafish, and chicken. Fine Scale: Uncovers a sharper, directionally asymmetric mammalian codon-choice core using a corrected target-scored H5 metric. GC3/Acidic-Proteome Artifact Control: Explicitly separates true lineage divergence from extreme environmental form mismatches (e.g., salt adaptation in H. salinarum), ensuring that compositional artifacts are not misread as conserved program syntax. Included Files: code_logos_perez_v3.tex.pdf — The full text of the updated preprint in PDF format. code_logos_perez_v3.tex — The LaTeX source code of the manuscript. super_codon_autonomous_v13.py — The autonomous Python script (v13) to fully reproduce the results. It features 1-click execution with automatic NCBI CDS downloading, one-gene-one-vote paralog filtering, and the application of all null models. logs.zip / full.json / full.md — The detailed execution logs, statistical matrices, and Markdown reports generated by the autonomous pipeline. Attribution Note: This pipeline measures the dynamical/program layer and treats static mirror/composition symmetry as form. Universal static attractors (such as the Human Genome Optimum) remain a separate orthogonal measurement within the same overarching form/substance programme.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.5281/zenodo.23294002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Metadata

Authors
Victor, L., & Perez, J. C.
Affiliations
Brest State A.S. Pushkin University
Venue
Zenodo
Publisher
Zenodo
Published
2026-10-11
Type
Preprint

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review