Two companion chapters from the same CEFR-leveled writing-pedagogy series referenced in 101 Week 14 (ch4-neural, ch9-phi). ch5-immune.html maps affinity maturation — a B-cell’s receptor reshaping across generations of division, selecting for better antigen binding — onto the K (curvature/commitment) operator: binding affinity rises through a threshold \(K^*\), at which the system commits irreversibly to clonal expansion and immune memory. ch2-allostatic.html maps allostatic load — the cumulative physiological cost of repeated adaptation, \(\lambda = \sum_i w_i s_i\) — onto the C (compression) operator: the body compresses adaptive responses into an efficient form, but that compression has a real, accumulating cost.
ch5-immune.html states directly, at the top of the page: “Preprints · dm³ mappings are labelled conjecture.” That disclosure is doing real work and should be preserved rather than smoothed over in a course summary — the immunology itself (affinity maturation, clonal selection) is standard, well-established biology; the mapping onto C/K/F/U is an explicitly conjectural teaching analogy layered on top of it, sourced to a companion preprint (“Biological Transitions as Multi-Agent Realisations,” Zenodo 20969152) rather than to peer-reviewed dm³ theory.
Read both chapters the way this course has asked you to read every application chapter: take the biology as given and well-supported on its own terms, and treat the operator-chain labeling as a proposed, testable analogy — run it against 101’s F1–F4 falsifiability conditions rather than accepting the label because the biology is real.
-- dm³ 102 · Week 14 · Applications — no new Lean this week -- -- Immune memory (K operator) and allostatic load (C operator) are -- disclosed conjectural analogies from a companion preprint series, -- not claims with Lean-checked status. Evaluate under F1-F4 -- (101 Week 3), same as every other application chapter. example : True := trivial