We establish a computation-substrate-agnostic inference architecture in which domain is an explicit first-class computational parameter. This produces domain-scoped pruning that reduces per-query search space from O(N) to O(N/K), substrate-independent execution over symbolic, neural, vector, and hybrid substrates, and transparent inference chains where every step carries its evaluative context. The contribution is architectural, not logical. We formalize the computational theory across five dimensions: a five-layer architecture; three domain computation modes including chain indexing, path traversal as Kleisli composition, and vector-guided computation as a substrate transition; a substrate-agnostic interface with three operations Query, Extend, Bridge; reliability conditions C1 to C4 with three failure mode classes; and validation through a PHQ-9 clinical reasoning case study. The computational theory including operational semantics, complexity bounds, monad structure, substrate transitions, and boundary conditions is the contribution of this paper.
Every existing knowledge system separates storage from computation. We show this separation is unnecessary and eliminate it. In a standard triple is_a(Apple, Company), domain context lives in the query or the programmer's mind. In a CDC four-tuple is_a(Apple, Company, @Business), domain becomes a structural field embedded in predicate arity. Any system respecting arity automatically performs domain-scoped inference without external rules. We call this representation-computation unity (RCU). From the four-tuple structure, three inference mechanisms emerge: domain-scoped closure, typed inheritance, and write-time falsification via cycle detection per domain fiber. We establish RCU formally via four theorems. RCU is implementable. We present a working symbolic engine (2400 lines Python+Prolog) resolving four engineering issues: rule-data separation, shared-fiber handling, read-only meta-layer design, and intersective convergence. A central result: CDC domain-constrained inference is distinct from Prolog with a domain argument. Two case studies validate the engine. ICD-11 classification (1247 entities, 3 axes) shows fibers resolve multiple inheritance. CBT clinical reasoning shows generalization to temporal reasoning with session turn as ordered domain index. Multi-constraint queries realize CSP arc-consistency with complexity O(m (N/K)^2), confirming the domain lattice's sparsity governs performance. When domain is structural, data computes itself.
We introduce BDH-CQ, a reasoning model that combines in-context learning with recurrent latent reasoning. Inputs presented at inference time continuously update the model's recurrent memory; the model then solves a query through iterative computation in a high-dimensional latent space, without verbalizing its intermediate reasoning. We evaluate the model on the public ARC-AGI-1 evaluation set and use controlled ARC-like interventions to study what it learns from demonstrations, how consistently it applies an inferred transformation, and which concepts remain difficult. A 150M-parameter configuration reaches 29.5% pass@2 at a computed inference cost of $0.0007 per task. This operating point breaks through the previously reported ARC-AGI-1 cost-accuracy Pareto frontier, establishing a new state of the art in benchmark cost efficiency.
Compositional generalization remains challenging when language models must combine familiar reasoning operations in unfamiliar ways. The Scenario-Based Commonsense Reasoning Evaluation (SCoRE) 2026 tests this ability on three mixed domains absent from training and requires models to identify the complete set of correct options for each question. We introduce Route-Verify-Vote (RVV), a framework for procedure-conditioned self-consistency that uses language models without parameter updates. Route uses the provided domain label to select a reasoning procedure that guides the model in representing and applying the relevant constraints. Verify prompts the model to assess each option against those constraints. Vote aggregates complete answer sets and allocates additional samples to questions with a small vote-count margin between the two most frequent sets. Samples for each question follow the same domain-specific procedure. On the official test set, voting over 16 sampled answer sets per question achieves an exact-set accuracy of 74.6%. Adaptive RVV reaches 77.3%, and combining models on selected domain routes raises accuracy to 79.4%. The final system ranked second among participating systems. These results support domain-specific reasoning procedures and answer-set disagreement as useful tools for allocating inference-time computation in mixed-domain reasoning.