See the full roadmap on GitHub.

North Stars

For phenomenon P with behavioral data D, prove that theory T₁ predicts D and theory T₂ doesn’t (or both do, via different assumptions).

Priority Phenomena

PhenomenonWhy Interesting
Scope FreezingProve CCG and Minimalism predict same freezing via different mechanisms
RSA ≅ EXH EquivalenceCharacterize when grammar/pragmatics debates are notational

Key Conjectures

  • rsa_fixed_point_unique: RSA iteration converges to a unique fixed point for α > 0
  • lexicon_refinement_monotone: Refining denotations can only strengthen pragmatic inferences
  • rsa_tropical_limit: α → ∞ recovers iterated best response (tropical semiring)

Short-term

  • Fill sorry proofs (scope freezing, CCG expressiveness)
  • Grounding proofs for lexical uncertainty, attitude embeddings
  • Scenario combinators (withUtterances, restrictWorlds)
  • Documentation: tutorials, replication guides

Long-term

  • Neural-symbolic emergence (Futrell & Hahn, RSA from LLM)
  • Speech acts formalization
  • Full Horn (1972) scale theory
  • Neo-Davidsonian event semantics