# Backcast from the desired future to the next defensible experiment

Proposed work packages / no delivery guarantees. Work package A proposes a software-first evidence commons: curate permitted recordings, implement data validation, reproduce a published analysis, and publish the claim register. Work package B proposes collaboration with a suitably equipped laboratory for one prespecified interface or transport comparison. Neither package assumes that Necromancer currently owns a laboratory, has secured partners, or has committed funding.

Canonical page: https://givegigs.com/wiki/necro-chapter-xdpu-evidence-gated-roadmap
Last updated: 2026-11-09T18:58:12.991Z
Parent topic: [necromancer-proposals](https://givegigs.com/wiki/necromancer-proposals)

## Contents
- [Overview](#wiki-section-overview-1)
- [Chapter notes](#wiki-section-chapter-notes-2)
- [Dossier section](#wiki-section-dossier-link-3)

<a id="wiki-section-overview-1"></a>
## Overview

Proposed work packages / no delivery guarantees. This page expands the “Backcast from the desired future to the next defensible experiment” chapter in the proposals collection.

<a id="wiki-section-chapter-notes-2"></a>
## Chapter notes

Work package A proposes a software-first evidence commons: curate permitted recordings, implement data validation, reproduce a published analysis, and publish the claim register. Work package B proposes collaboration with a suitably equipped laboratory for one prespecified interface or transport comparison. Neither package assumes that Necromancer currently owns a laboratory, has secured partners, or has committed funding.

Work package C would evaluate closed-loop function only after reliable measurement and appropriate review. Work package D would test an injury-and-recovery question with independent replication, treating cellular health, network function, organism-level outcomes, memory, and identity as separate endpoints. Budgets require real quotations and staffing plans; progression depends on evidence, not a calendar promise.

The future scenario is increasingly capable biological repair supported by transparent tools and voluntary collaboration. Bringing back a person after permanent loss of brain function remains unestablished and may face irrecoverable information loss. That uncertainty leaves meaningful work today: better measurements, better models, and better decisions. Narrative can recruit the will to begin; each experiment determines what becomes possible next.

<a id="wiki-section-dossier-link-3"></a>
## Dossier section

[Open this exact section in the Necromancer dossier](/necromancer#xdpu-evidence-gated-roadmap). The original chapter status is “Proposed work packages / no delivery guarantees.”

## Sources

- [Pediatric and Adult Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria Consensus Guideline](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37821233/)
- [Restoration of brain circulation and cellular functions hours post-mortem](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30996318/)
- [Cellular recovery after prolonged warm ischaemia of the whole body](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35922506/)

---
This article is collaboratively maintained. Check the canonical page and cited sources for the latest context.