Reusable cognitive primitives
Source–pathway–receptor
Harm reaches a target only when a source, a connecting pathway and an exposed receptor all exist; break any link and the harm does not arrive.
Where it appears
Dependencies & synergies
Derived from the graph’s real structure — 4 concepts across 12 disciplines carry this pattern. Every figure is a count, not a score.
How many concepts carrying this pattern are seen through each discipline.
Other thinking patterns that recur on the same concepts — the more shared concepts, the more often they co-occur.
What kinds of relationships the carrying concepts form — the relational signature of the pattern.
Concepts where this pattern does the most cross-disciplinary work — each reaches disciplines beyond its own.
- RiskreachesActuarial ScienceBusinessData ScienceEntrepreneurshipEnvironmental ScienceEpidemiologyEpistemologyMachine LearningMathematicsNetwork SciencePhotographyProbabilityPublic HealthToxicology
- ExposurereachesAudio EngineeringEconomicsEthicsFinanceMathematicsMedicinePublic PolicySignal ProcessingStatistics
- Chain of infectionreachesMedicineMicrobiology
- Environmental surveillancereachesEnvironmental EngineeringEpidemiology
Examples across disciplines
A pollutant seeps via groundwater to a well people drink from.
A pathogen reservoir → transmission route → susceptible host (the chain of infection).
A contaminant → ingestion → a target organ.
An attacker (source) reaches a vulnerable asset (receptor) along a network path.
How this pattern travels
Interpreted from where the pattern recurs in the atlas — structural transfer and coverage, not a claim it is universally the "best" model.
Recurs across 12 disciplines over 4 carrier concepts — concentrated (75% of carriers in one field).
structural · Structural recurrence in the atlas — a pattern is a reasoning lens, not a law.
2 of its 4 carrier concepts are themselves cross-disciplinary connectors.
structural · Structural recurrence in the atlas — a pattern is a reasoning lens, not a law.
Explicit "where it breaks" notes exist for 0 of 4 annotated assignments.
curated · Curated boundary annotations — absence is a representation gap, not evidence the model has no limits.
Currently dark in the atlas: no origin recorded · no assignment cites a source · no boundary annotations.
atlas representation · Describes the current Thinking OS representation, not the model itself.
Coverage matrix
How these concepts distribute across domains and concept families — real counts, not a score.
The statistical fingerprint
How the 4 concepts that exercise this pattern distribute — from the graph, not a ranking.
Disciplinary fingerprint
Carrier concepts under each illuminating lens.
How settled its carriers are
Epistemic status of the concepts that exercise this pattern.
✕ A hazard is automatically a risk. Without a pathway to an exposed receptor, even a severe hazard causes no harm.
You have seen this model in one place. Where else could it apply — and where would the analogy break?
Chain of infection →Don't ask only 'is it dangerous?' Trace it: where does it start, how does it travel, and what does it reach? A hazard with no pathway to a receptor is no risk.
- Recurs across 12 disciplines.
- 15 concepts exercise this thinking pattern.
Derived from the graph — a pattern is a reasoning lens, not a law.
Is there a complete chain from a source, along a pathway, to a receptor that can be harmed — and which link is easiest to break?
Keep this question handy when you meet something new — it helps you notice the pattern, not just name it.