Substrate-dependent theories are best understood not as an additional level but as cross-cutting realisability constraints on existing levels

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Computation is fundamentally substrate-dependent; energy efficiency is the constraint that induces multiscale, scale-integrated computation.claim0.797
  Core assertion distinguishing biological computationalism from functionalism; rejects simulation-instantiation equivalence.
• Biological substrate views will not meet the second criterion for suitable theories because they imply conditions that AI systems straightforwardly cannot meet.claim0.793
  Explains why biological naturalism is excluded from current indicator derivation while still being relevant to overall assessments
• Is Cognition Fundamentally Substrateindependent Or Are There Constraintsquestion0.772
• Mainstream theories of consciousness are already substrate-neutral at the primitive level.claim0.769
• It is functions all the way down: physical substrate refers only to a particular representational medium implemented as discernible differencesclaim0.747
  Radical functionalist claim grounding computationalism: no substrate is metaphysically privileged over its functional description
• A system-agnostic approach evaluating observable response patterns without reference to substrate offers the best roadmap for empirically fruitful unification.claim0.745
  Core argumentative position: sentience assessment should focus on behavior, not substrate composition; extends to AI and robotic systems.
• Most theories of consciousness are already substrate-neutral; neurocentric readings are convention, not content commitment.claim0.743
• Cognition and learning are substrate-independent.quote0.742
  Bold, load-bearing tenet of the paper's framework.