feat(submissions): rebuild DIAL response as full IJHCS article re-coding Belousov et al. corpus

[rogerSuperBuilderAlpha]

Summary

Rebuilds submissions/dial_response_algorithmacy/draft.md from a ~3k-word commentary into a ~12.6k-word full research article that mirrors Belousov, Macey, Bujić, Ojell-Järventausta & Hamari (2027, IJHCS 218, 103926) section for section, and re-codes their fixed 25-novel corpus.

Three substitutions run through every section:

• Interface: brain–computer interface → the algorithmic third party (a mediator whose state one party's engagement rewrites and another party later meets).
• Theory of alteration: input discrepancy → IIT's cause–effect reconfiguration (Tononi 2004; Oizumi et al. 2014; Albantakis et al. 2023). No Φ computed on fiction; the lab's Φ_MIP = 0 / > 0 reading is cited, not re-derived.
• Unit of analysis: user–technology dyad → party / mediator / counterpart triad.

What's in the article

• §1–2: introduction and background (three components, IIT criterion, reading already reorganises the brain, SF as inquiry and the layer to code at).
• §3: methods — secondary re-coding of their published corpus (A1–A25) plus six catalogued works (M1–M6: The Matrix, The Feed, Upload, embodied co-pilot, omniscient curator, algospeak). Inclusion criterion: cooptive commit. Every scene carries an evidence tag (extract / canon / to verify / thin / catalog).
• §4: reach × act framework → eight interaction types (folk theorizing, backend reading, shared folk theory, audit, training by response, subversive affordance, operator commit [centralized / distributed], protocol shipping), each walked through both corpora with extracts and fielded analogues.
• §5: five themes — write access stratified by licence; contribution as extraction; the self as a node others rewrite; truth as mediator commitment; pastoral design vs collective algorithmacy.
• §6–7, declarations, Appendix A (31 rows), references.

Files

• draft.md — full rewrite (old commentary in git history; its argument absorbed into §1–2 and §5.5).
• corpus_coding.md — new: per-scene coding sheet, cell membership summary, leakage table. Every [A#]/[M#] in the body resolves to a row here and in Appendix A (script-checked).
• outline.md, CLAIM.md, abstract.md, README.md, SOURCE.md — retitled for the article; SOURCE records the corpus re-use.
• submissions/README.md — row text.
• scifi_interfaces_algorithmacy/ENGAGEMENT_LAYER.md — two cross-reference section numbers updated.

Verification

• build_index.py --check, build_map.py --check, build_research_index.py --check all clean.
• Draft-skill report (nearest register eit, uncalibrated): tail-head 49%, zero stacked runs, zero drumbeats; em-dash rate brought from 9.7/1k to 1.2/1k (Belousov runs ~0.7). Main text 12.6k words vs Belousov's ~12.0k.
• Banned emphasis openers: none.

Before submission (recorded in packet README)

• Six to verify codings (A1, A3, A10, A14, A23 ×2) need checking against the novels; no theme rests on them alone.
• Confirm generative-AI declaration wording against IJHCS policy.
• Confirm Belousov et al. (2024) Mindtrek page span from the target article's reference list.

No exact-Φ numbers claimed; nothing registered in ci/reproduce.json is touched.