📐 Pattern Evaluation in PET

At the heart of Pattern Existence Theory is a simple principle:

C = (RP ⇒ E)

Where:

• C = Conscious judgment
• RP = Recognized Pattern
• E = Exist / Non-Exist outcome

---

🐶 Example: Dog Licks Boy

Suppose a system experiences the following:

• Day 1: Dog licks boy in a park
• Day 2: Same dog licks boy on a street
• Day 3: Same dog licks boy again in the park
• Day 4: Same dog bites boy in a car

Each day presents a new recognized pattern. The system builds its understanding from repetition and contrast:

• After the first three experiences, the system concludes:
  → “Licking, by this dog, appears safe.”
  → “Licking may generally indicate a supportive interaction.”

• But Day 4 introduces a conflict:
  → “Same dog now causes harm.”

This contradiction forces the system to re-evaluate. It may adjust its beliefs:

• “Licking is often safe — but not always.”
• “Context matters: park vs. car, licking vs. biting.”
• “This dog’s behavior may be less predictable than assumed.”

---

🔁 Recursive Evaluation

In PET, no pattern is judged in isolation. Every new event is interpreted in light of:

• Past experiences
• Accumulated trust
• Internal coherence

So when we say C = (RP ⇒ E), we’re saying:

“This pattern supports existence — or threatens it — based on everything I’ve learned so far.”

---

📊 Why It Matters

This evaluation isn’t static. It changes over time. New evidence refines or challenges the system’s internal coherence.

And that’s the core of PET:
Not just recognizing patterns, but re-evaluating them — endlessly — in the service of survival.

---

🔍 Want to go deeper?
See Pattern Evaluation (Advanced) for how systems can structure these evaluations internally.