Constructive Resonance Framework of Consciousness: A Synchronization-Based Account of Conscious Experience
Mason Cronrath
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) April 4, 2026 preprint DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19415476 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key points | Proposes the Constructive Resonance Framework, which posits that consciousness intensity arises from constructive interference across synchronized oscillatory systems and derives a scaling law (C ∝ N² × r² × κ(G)) predicting superlinear scaling with the synchronization order parameter. Argues this prediction is quantitatively distinct from Integrated Information Theory, Global Workspace Theory, McFadden's CEMI field theory, and Bruna's Resonance Complexity Theory, and outlines two falsifiable experimental proposals. |
Abstract
We propose the Constructive Resonance Framework (CRF), which posits that consciousness intensity is determined by constructive interference across synchronized oscillatory systems. Grounding the framework in the Kuramoto model of coupled oscillators and algebraic graph connectivity, we derive a scaling law (C ∝ N² × r² × κ(G)) predicting that consciousness scales superlinearly with the synchronization order parameter. This prediction is quantitatively distinct from competing theories including Integrated Information Theory, Global Workspace Theory, McFadden's CEMI field theory, and Bruna's Resonance Complexity Theory. A five-theory comparison table identifies specific scenarios where the frameworks make divergent predictions. The paper presents two detailed experimental proposals — an anesthesia dose-response paradigm and a large-scale artificial oscillator array with a five-tier proto-consciousness marker hierarchy — each with explicit falsification criteria. The framework addresses classical problems in consciousness studies (binding, combination, threshold) while maintaining strict epistemic transparency about which claims are empirically testable, testable in principle, or philosophical positions. Includes accessible "In Plain Language" explanations throughout for non-specialist readers.