You might be interested in something like Coq [0], but even with literal software it's very very hard to prove logical correctness, let alone wishy-washy real-world things like "when I mixed these two chemicals they turned greenish which probably suggests X."
Best I can see happening is a way to visualize relationships between research papers so that humans can argue over what it really means. Like a graph of edges where "this paper cites that one and one strongly depends on it being true for its own conclusions", or "this one claims it did/didn't disprove that other one", and retroactive additions like "an outside observer noticed that X and Y are probably either both correct or both incorrect."
Terr_|11 months ago
Best I can see happening is a way to visualize relationships between research papers so that humans can argue over what it really means. Like a graph of edges where "this paper cites that one and one strongly depends on it being true for its own conclusions", or "this one claims it did/didn't disprove that other one", and retroactive additions like "an outside observer noticed that X and Y are probably either both correct or both incorrect."
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocq_(software)