Editing Openai/690e5821-e2c8-8007-a5a4-e71fe35fb0ce (section)

==== However, the PCT draft brings in certain additional layers, expansions or reinterpretations of what the article presents. Here are some of the differences: ====
# Broader pattern-oriented scope The article is specifically about software diagnostics (artefacts, dumps, traces). PCT is framed more broadly: patterns in diagnostics, AI, memory, cognition, pattern oriented intelligence. So PCT generalises beyond the domain of that article.
# Explicit emphasis on functors between domains of patterns While the article has functors from artefacts → problem patterns, PCT emphasises functors more broadly: e.g., domain-mapping functors (software→AI diagnostic domains), composition of functors, functorial stability of pattern mappings, natural transformations between functors (theory-level). The article hints at natural transformations in CAnalysisPatterns but doesn’t explore the functorial ecology.
# Monoidal / tensor structure, topos, higher categorical constructs In PCT I introduced the idea of a monoidal category of patterns (⊗ for co-occurrence of patterns), and even the concept of a pattern topos (logical universe of patterns). The article doesn’t explicitly cover such higher categorical / logical universes.
# Philosophical framing: Memoidealism, Pattern-Oriented Intelligence My PCT draft integrates a philosophical layer (memory as substrate of morphisms, intelligence as functorial coherence). The article is technical/diagnostic and doesn’t frame in those philosophical terms.
# Pattern composition and emergent patterns PCT emphasises how basic patterns compose to emergent patterns (P2 ∘ P1 = P3). The article is more about mapping artefacts → patterns → analysis patterns but less about emergent composition of patterns in a general sense.