Release Notes: v1.1, Major Methodology Update

Date: February 2026

Subject: Transitioning from an operational framework to an STS-aligned model of commensurability.

The Conversion Index (TCI) was initially designed with a highly structured, quantitative, and operational taxonomy. Drawing heavily from computational physics and engineering, the v1.0 methodology treated knowledge transfer as a mechanical process with measurable “loss.” Following extensive review and feedback from faculty mentor Prof. Roberts, the TCI methodology has been significantly restructured. The project has shifted away from a reductive, technical vocabulary toward a rigorous, humanistic framework grounded in the history and philosophy of science (specifically Thomas Kuhn’s concept of commensurability). The updated page can be viewed in the Methodology section of the site.

This page serves as a record of those specific conceptual upgrades, followed by an archive of the original v1.0 methodology.

Addressing the Terminology: Translation vs. Conversion

In earlier iterations of this project, the term “conversion” was deliberately chosen over “translation.” This was because “translation” is often narrowly perceived as a purely linguistic exercise: the simple swapping of words. The project required a broader term that could encompass both the mechanical shifting of engineering units and the complex transfer of historical ideologies. However, as Prof. Roberts pointed out, “conversion” carries its own misleading baggage, frequently evoking either rigid mathematical equations or dramatic, individual religious transformations. To better align with the historical and philological nature of this research, TCI has adopted the terminology of transmission and conceptual translation. By explicitly emphasizing the conceptual rather than the strictly linguistic, the TCI framework tries to capture the deep friction of adapting ideas across worldviews, without reducing humanistic inquiry to a simple input/output formula.

Specific Upgrades in v2.0

• From “Axes” to “Commensurability”: The rigid classification architecture (Axis A/B/C) has been replaced. Cases are now categorized by their degree of commensurability (the ability to map one conceptual framework onto another). This accurately separates routine intra-paradigm errors (e.g., unit conversion failures) from complex cross-paradigm gaps (e.g., mapping classical Chinese concepts to modern frameworks).
• From “Conversion Loss” to “Translational Friction”: The mathematical concept of a “loss” implies a perfect, objective standard from which something deviated. “Translational Friction” better captures the semantic decay, ideological distortion, and active negotiation that occurs when forcing a concept into an incompatible target system.
• Resisting Reductionism: The explicit mathematical notation seen in the archive has been removed to avoid alienating humanistic audiences with overly technical, “cookie-cutter” jargon. The project now actively preserves the nuance and ambiguity necessary for historical analysis.

Other, more specific updates and references can be found in the methods page here.

---

Archive: TCI Initial Methodology (v1.0)

For transparency and historical reference, the original methodology draft is preserved below.

1. Definitions

• Conversion: An operational transfer of a concept, quantity, or procedure from a source system ($\,S_0\,$) to a target system ($\,S_t\,$).
• Conversion Loss ($\,\Delta t\,$): The observable distortion, semantic decay, or operational error introduced during a conversion.
• Critical Failure: A conversion loss that produces epistemic invalidity, operational breakdown, or safety-critical risk.

2. Inclusion Protocol

A case is included in the Conversion Index only if the point of failure can be isolated at the level of the conversion interface. The Index does not document general misunderstandings; it documents broken transfers between systems. Each valid case must satisfy:

• Identifiable Systems: Source and target systems are distinct and explicitly defined.
• Specified Conversion Operation: The mechanism of transfer (e.g., manual calculation, textual translation, software parsing, institutional rule-mapping) is documented.
• Observable Impact: The conversion loss produces a detectable epistemic, operational, or safety-relevant consequence. Purely hypothetical cases or failures without downstream effects are excluded.

3. Classification Architecture (Taxonomy)

Each case is classified along a fixed set of axes.

• Axis A: Domain: Identifies the primary knowledge system (Physical, Computational, Linguistic).
• Axis B: Conversion Interface: Identifies where the transfer occurs (Human, Instrumental, Software, Institutional).
• Axis C: Failure Mode: Identifies how the conversion degrades (Protocol Mismatch, Silent Failure, Lossy Abstraction, Semantic Drift).
• Impact Category: Epistemic Distortion, Operational Breakdown, or Safety-Critical Failure.

4. System Boundaries

• Prototype Scope: The current dataset is a curated pilot set intended to validate the classification framework.
• Interpretive Margin: Physical and computational failures are often binary; linguistic and institutional conversions involve interpretive judgment.
• Current Constraint: The Index currently lacks a computational method for quantifying semantic drift across large textual corpora.