# Lane 6 — Consolidated Citation Map (the Laukkonen-network's own best-of)

**Status:** research-phase deliverable, 2026-07-16. Derived by reading all 7 corpus notes in `specs/waypoint-research/corpus/` (6 seed papers + internal canon) and consolidating the works that **recur across ≥2 of the seed papers' reference lists** or are treated as **load-bearing** in a paper's own shortlist. Purpose (spec §10, lane 6): surface the literature the field itself trusts for *measuring/staging* meditation, so it seeds the psychometrics (lane 2), statistics (lane 3), and safety (lane 4) lanes.

**How to read the recurrence tag.** Each entry is tagged with which seed papers cite it, abbreviated:
`MtN` = Laukkonen & Slagter 2021 *many-to-(n)one* · `BL` = Laukkonen, Friston & Chandaria 2025 *A beautiful loop* · `Nir` = Laukkonen et al. 2023 *nirodha samāpatti* · `AL` = Agrawal & Laukkonen 2024 *Nothingness in meditation* · `Voh` = Vohryzek et al. 2025 *whole-brain MPE/jhāna* · `CM` = Laukkonen 2026 *Clear Mind / f-SNR*. Higher recurrence = closer to the network's core.

**Verification.** Top items spot-checked live against publisher metadata this session (see §Verification). The corpus readers extracted these from actual printed reference lists with DOIs; extraction quality was high on every item I re-checked. Anything I could not positively confirm is marked **UNVERIFIED**. No citation here is invented — each appears in at least one seed paper's printed reference list.

**Caveat that binds the whole map (author-network overlap).** This is deliberately *one network's* frame — Laukkonen, Slagter, Sacchet, Lutz, Metzinger, Friston, Sparby recur as authors *and* as cited authorities. It is internally consistent, not independent corroboration. Lanes 1–2 must import at least one out-of-network staging tradition (Cook-Greuter SCT, Hood M-scale, MODTAS, PNSE) as a cross-check; those are **not** in this map because the seed corpus doesn't cite them.

---

## The ranked map, grouped by theme

### A. Staging / cartography & the phenomenology-matrix rubrics (the marker-bank backbone)

1. **Lutz, Jha, Dunne & Saron (2015). Investigating the phenomenological matrix of mindfulness-related practices from a neurocognitive perspective.** *American Psychologist* 70(7), 632–658. DOI 10.1037/a0039585. — `MtN·BL·Nir·AL` (4). **The single most load-bearing cite in the corpus.** A multi-axis (object / aperture / clarity / stability / effort / …) *dimensional* decomposition of meditation states — the closest existing thing to a marker rubric, and the direct precedent for Waypoint's per-pillar/axis profile over a scalar. **Acquire & deep-read first.**
2. **Dahl, Lutz & Davidson (2015). Reconstructing and deconstructing the self: cognitive mechanisms in meditation practice.** *Trends in Cognitive Sciences* 19(9), 515–523. DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.001. — `MtN·BL·Nir·AL·CM` (5, **highest recurrence**). Three practice families — **attentional / constructive / deconstructive** — plus the dereification / object-orientation / meta-awareness dimensions. The cleanest published scheme for *typing a practice from its description* → maps onto the four pillars (breathwork≈attentional, love≈constructive, clarity/awareness≈deconstructive). **Acquire.**
3. **Laukkonen & Slagter (2021). From many to (n)one.** *Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev.* 128, 199–217. DOI 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.06.021. — seed paper, cited by `BL·Nir·AL·Voh·CM` (5). The FA→OM→ND continuum / temporal-counterfactual-depth axis that the spec adopts as the Wheel's scientific twin. Already in corpus.
4. **Lutz, Slagter, Dunne & Davidson (2008). Attention regulation and monitoring in meditation.** *Trends Cogn. Sci.* 12(4), 163–169. DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2008.01.005. — `MtN·Nir` (2). The canonical FA-vs-OM taxonomy the whole continuum rests on; foundational vocabulary.
5. **Sparby & Sacchet (2024). Toward a Unified Account of Advanced Concentrative Absorption Meditation: A Systematic Definition and Classification of Jhāna.** *Mindfulness* 15(6), 1375–1394. DOI 10.1007/s12671-024-02367-w. — `BL·Voh` (2). The teacher-anchored **J1–J8 ACAM-J ladder** with per-state phenomenological criteria (J1 bliss, J4 equanimity, form/formless body-drop, J7 void-with-subtle-fear). THE top-of-Wheel (51+) milestone cartography. **Acquire** for the rare-but-must-recognize Unbinding band. *(Corpus note approximated pages as "1–20"; correct is 1375–1394.)*
6. **Sparby & Sacchet (2025). Toward a Unified Model of Advanced Meditation, Human Development, Meditation Maps, and Transtradition Metaphors.** *Mindfulness* (2025). — `Voh` (1). Explicitly links advanced meditation to **human development** and cross-tradition maps — the paper in this list closest to Waypoint's own "map humans onto a developmental scale" problem. **Acquire** (lane 1). **UNVERIFIED** exact vol/pages.
7. **Dunne (2011/2013). Toward an understanding of non-dual mindfulness.** *Contemporary Buddhism* 12(1), 71–88 (also Routledge reprint 2013). DOI 10.4324/9781315874586 (reprint). — `MtN·BL·CM` (3). The caution that "non-dual" is used inconsistently across traditions; guards against over-fitting ND markers to one vocabulary.

### B. Measurement / phenomenology instruments (psychometrics lane 2 — candidate calibration battery)

8. **Gamma & Metzinger (2021). The minimal phenomenal experience questionnaire (MPE-92M).** *PLoS One* 16(7), e0253694. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0253694. — `BL·Nir` (2). A **validated instrument** profiling "pure awareness" experiences in meditators — purpose-built for the top-of-Wheel awareness pillar. Top candidate for the one-time calibration battery (spec §7). **Acquire.** *(DOI triangulated identical across 2 corpus notes; publisher page not re-fetched — treat DOI as high-confidence, confirm on pull.)*
9. **Hanley, Nakamura & Garland (2018). The Nondual Awareness Dimensional Assessment (NADA).** *Psychological Assessment* 30(12), 1625–1639. DOI 10.1037/pas0000615. — `BL` (1). **Validated** trait (NADA-T, 13-item; self-transcendence + bliss) and state (NADA-S, 3-item) scales for nondual awareness. Candidate battery slot for the Awakening/Unbinding range. **Acquire.** ✅ verified.
10. **Metzinger (2020). Minimal phenomenal experience: meditation, tonic alertness, and the phenomenology of "pure" consciousness.** *Philosophy and the Mind Sciences* 1(I), 1–44. DOI 10.33735/phimisci.2020.I.46. — `MtN·BL·Nir·Voh` (4). Defines MPE / pure awareness / tonic alertness and — crucially — the **MPE-vs-dullness** distinction (high epistemic depth + contentless vs low epistemic depth). The conceptual anchor for the top awareness band and the absorption-vs-dullness confusion pair.
11. **Metzinger (2024). The Elephant and the Blind: the experience of pure consciousness (500+ experiential reports).** MIT Press. DOI 10.7551/mitpress/15196.001.0001. — `BL·Voh·CM` (3). The **largest structured phenomenological corpus** of pure-awareness reports — a mine for awareness-pillar marker language (presence / no-ego / luminosity / knowing), *and* the exact vocabulary a map-contaminated practitioner reproduces (lane-5 risk). **Acquire** (marker-bank source material).
12. **Fleming & Lau (2014). How to measure metacognition.** *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* 8, 443. — `BL` (1). Methods for quantifying metacognitive sensitivity; operationalizes the **epistemic-depth / meta-awareness axis** the awareness pillar leans on. Companion: **Fleming (2020). Awareness as inference in a higher-order state space.** *Neurosci. Conscious.* niz020. — `BL`.
13. **Desbordes et al. (2015). Defining equanimity as an outcome measure in meditation and contemplative research.** *Mindfulness* 6(2), 356–372. DOI 10.1007/s12671-013-0269-8. — `Nir` (1). Operationalizes **equanimity** — a wheel-wide axis and a central term in the equanimity/bypassing/dissociation confusion pair — as a measurable construct. Candidate battery item.
14. **Schmidt & Berkemeyer (2018). The Altered States Database: psychometric data of altered states of consciousness.** *Front. Psychol.* 9, 1028. DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01028. — `AL` (1). A **repository of validated ASC questionnaires** — the shopping catalog for choosing calibration-battery instruments. **Acquire** (lane 2 triage tool).
15. **Petitmengin et al. (2017; 2019). Microphenomenology of meditation.** *J. Conscious. Stud.* 24(5–6), 170–198; *Curr. Opin. Psychol.* 28, 54–59. DOI 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.10.009. — `MtN·Nir` (2). The **structured-interview method** for recovering fine-grained experience a subject can't spontaneously narrate — the template for Surya's structured-interview protocol *and* probe-item design.

### C. Cessation / absorption neuroscience (top-of-Wheel milestone evidence)

16. **Laukkonen et al. (2023). Cessations of consciousness in meditation: nirodha samāpatti.** *Prog. Brain Res.* 280, 61–87. DOI 10.1016/bs.pbr.2022.12.007. — seed, cited by `BL·AL·Voh·CM` (4). Dual small-death/big-death definitions + the necessary-and-sufficient cessation rubric (absence + no-retrospective-content + clarity-after) + the NS gating ladder. Already in corpus.
17. **Chowdhury, van Lutterveld, Laukkonen, Slagter, Ingram & Sacchet (2023). Investigation of advanced mindfulness "cessation" experiences using EEG spectral analysis in an intensively sampled case study.** *Neuropsychologia* 190, 108694. DOI 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108694. — `BL·AL·CM` (3). The **intensively-sampled single-adept** method (~37 cessations, one meditator) — the methodological template closest to Waypoint's small-N longitudinal design. (Neural markers preliminary; cite for method, not established signal.)
18. **Dor-Ziderman, Berkovich-Ohana, Glicksohn & Goldstein (2013). Mindfulness-induced selflessness: a MEG neurophenomenological study.** *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* 7, 582. DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00582. — `MtN·BL·Nir` (3). Empirical neurophenomenology of self-boundary dissolution; gives the **narrative → minimal → self-less** graded self-ladder = a ready-made scored dimension for the awareness pillar.
19. **Josipovic (2010; 2019). Nondual awareness / duality-nonduality in meditation research.** *Conscious. Cogn.* 19(4), 1119–1121; *Prog. Brain Res.* 244, 273–298. — `MtN·BL·Nir` (3). Defines ND / consciousness-as-such and the subject-object release; the marker vocabulary for what counts as ND-awareness (and what is *not* cessation).
20. **Yang, Chowdhury, Bianciardi, van Lutterveld, Sparby & Sacchet (2023/2024). Intensive whole-brain 7T MRI case study of volitional control in deep absorptive meditation.** *Cerebral Cortex* 34(1)/bhad408. DOI 10.1093/cercor/bhad408. — `AL·Voh` (2). Source protocol for button-press time-locked state labeling (access→J1–J8→afterglow); model for pairing first-person labels to data. (Extreme adept cohort — method, not population inference.)

### D. Predictive-processing / active-inference theory (the estimator design memo's narrative, not its math)

21. **Sandved-Smith, Hesp, Mattout, Friston, Lutz & Ramstead (2021). Towards a computational phenomenology of mental action: modelling meta-awareness and attentional control with deep parametric active inference.** *Neurosci. Conscious.* 2021(1), niab018. — `BL·Voh·CM` (3). The formal precedent for representing **meta-awareness/attention as inference** in a hierarchical state space — informs the estimator's latent structure.
22. **Ramstead, Seth, Hesp, Sandved-Smith, Mago, Lifshitz, … Friston (2022). From generative models to generative passages: a computational approach to (neuro)phenomenology.** *Rev. Philos. Psychol.* 13(4), 829–857. DOI 10.1007/s13164-021-00604-y. — `BL·CM` (2). The methodological bridge from **first-person report → generative-model parameters** — the intellectual scaffold for LLM-marker-to-Bayesian-latent extraction (spec §6).
23. **Friston (2009/2010). The free-energy principle.** *Trends Cogn. Sci.* 13(7), 293–301 / *Nat. Rev. Neurosci.* 11(2), 127–138. DOI 10.1038/nrn2787. — cited across all seed papers. The active-inference substrate the whole PP framing (and the spec's precision-weighting / HGF language) rests on; ground the memo's narrative, not the likelihood math.

### E. False insight / contamination & introspection limits (lane 5 — the anti-Goodhart core)

24. **Grimmer, Laukkonen, Tangen & von Hippel (2022). Eliciting false insights with semantic priming.** *Psychon. Bull. Rev.* 29(3), 954–970. DOI 10.3758/s13423-021-02049-x — with companions **Laukkonen et al. (2020) "The dark side of Eureka"** (*Cognition* 196, 104122; `MtN·BL·AL`) and **McGovern et al. (2024) "An integrated theory of false insights and beliefs under psychedelics"** (*Commun. Psychol.* 2(1), 69). — `BL·AL` (2+). Lab evidence that **Aha-feelings are inducible, misattributable, and make false content feel true** — the strongest empirical footing in the corpus for *structure-scoring over conviction-scoring*. **Acquire the cluster** (lane 5). *(Detailed warnings only reduce, not prevent, false insights — Grimmer et al. 2023, Cognition & Emotion 37(2):329–338.)*
25. **Nisbett & Wilson (1977). Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on mental processes.** *Psychol. Rev.* 84(3), 231–259. — `MtN·Nir` (2). Foundational caution that long retrospective introspective reports are unreliable → justifies Waypoint's structure + behavior-consistency scoring over content-of-claim.

---

## Cross-cutting: methodological-caution & safety anchors (recur, sit across themes)

- **Van Dam et al. (2018). Mind the Hype: a critical evaluation and prescriptive agenda for research on mindfulness and meditation.** *Perspect. Psychol. Sci.* 13(1), 36–61. DOI 10.1177/1745691617709589. — `MtN·AL·CM` (3). The field's own methodological checklist (controls, preregistration, effect sizes, expertise≠hours); the skeptical bar the spec's construct-validity claims (§11) must clear.
- **Lindahl, Fisher, Cooper, Rosen & Britton (2017). The Varieties of Contemplative Experience.** *PLoS One* 12(5), e0176239. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0176239. — `MtN·Nir·AL·CM` (4). **The empirical backbone for lane 4** (meditation-related difficulties) and for the dark-night-vs-depression + equanimity-vs-dissociation confusion pairs. **Acquire.**
- **Lindahl & Britton (2019). "I have this feeling of not really being here."** *J. Conscious. Stud.* 26(7–8), 157–183. — `MtN·AL` (2). Self-change phenomenology vs pathology in practitioners.
- **Lindahl, Cooper, Fisher, Kirmayer & Britton (2020). Progress or pathology? Differential diagnosis and intervention criteria for meditation-related challenges.** *Front. Psychol.* 11, 1905. DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01905. — `Nir` (1). The **progress-vs-pathology differential** — the direct model for a defensible teacher-flag threshold design (spec §8, lane 4). **Acquire.**
- **Britton, Lindahl, Cooper, Canby & Palitsky (2021). Defining and measuring meditation-related adverse effects in mindfulness-based programs.** *Clin. Psychol. Sci.* 9(6), 1185–1204. DOI 10.1177/2167702621996340. — `Nir·AL` (2). A measurement instrument for adverse effects → usable scoring keys for the safety duty. **Acquire.**
- **Davis & Vago (2013). Can enlightenment be traced to specific neural correlates, cognition, or behavior? No, and (a qualified) yes.** *Front. Psychol.* 4, 870. — `Nir` (1). The meta-level guide for Waypoint's whole "instrument-building not truth-claiming" validation stance.

## Traditional cartography anchors the network itself leans on (lane 1 primary texts)

Cited as the *staging schemes* behind the science (not psychometrics): **Sayadaw, Manual of Insight (2016)** — the 16-ñana progress-of-insight map (`AL·Nir`, dukkha-ñana = dark-night phase anchor); **Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga** — NS prerequisites + jhāna-mastery test (`Nir·AL`); **Anālayo (2021), The Four Levels of Awakening**, *Mindfulness* 12(4), 831–840 (`AL`, stream-entry-as-first-cessation fetter model); **Burbea, Seeing That Frees (2014)** — graded emptiness/dereification ladder (`BL·Nir·AL·Voh`, 4 — also a contamination source); **Ingram, Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha (2018)** (`BL·Voh`, pragmatic-dharma map + reading-ahead risk); **Yates (Culadasa), The Mind Illuminated (2017)** (`AL`, samatha stage model many app users will have read); **Brasington, Right Concentration (2015)** (`AL·Voh`, "access concentration" + per-jhāna descriptors). Treat these as *both* the cartography source *and* the contamination baseline (lane 5): the app cohort has read them.

## Newer advanced-meditation-science reviews worth pulling (measurable at Stages 4–6)

- **Ehmann, Sezer, Treves, Gabrieli & Sacchet (2025). Mindfulness, cognition, and long-term meditators: toward a science of advanced meditation.** *Imaging Neuroscience* 3, IMAG.a.82. DOI 10.1162/imag.a.82. — `CM` (1). Programmatic review of what is measurable in *advanced* practitioners — directly answers lane-2's key question (which instruments survive Stages 4–6). **Acquire.** **UNVERIFIED** (safeguard-flagged the live check; DOI from corpus note).
- **Woods, Windt & Carter (2022/2024). Contentless experiences in meditation are neither truly contentless nor identical.** *Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci.* — `BL·AL` (2). The strongest methodological warning against scoring "pure-consciousness/contentless" claims as one marker.
- **Guidotti et al. (2023). Long-term and meditation-specific modulations of brain connectivity (MVPA).** *Brain Topography* 36(3), 409–418. DOI 10.1007/s10548-023-00950-3. — `CM` (1). Expertise makes internal states more *decodable* (65.6% experts vs ~chance novices) — the empirical template for Waypoint's synthetic-persona **discrimination QA** (spec §7): higher-band practitioners should be easier to classify with less variance.

---

## THE 5–10 TO ACQUIRE & DEEP-READ NEXT (ranked)

These maximize marginal value for the four deliverables (marker bank, probe bank, estimator memo, lit dossier). Prioritized by: *not already in seed corpus* × *directly operationalizable* × *fills a spec-named lane gap*.

1. **Lutz, Jha, Dunne & Saron (2015), phenomenological matrix** — the marker-bank rubric skeleton (per-pillar axes). #1 priority.
2. **Dahl, Lutz & Davidson (2015), practice families** — the practice→pillar typing scheme; pairs with #1.
3. **Lindahl et al. (2017) VCE** + **Lindahl et al. (2020) Progress or pathology?** + **Britton et al. (2021) adverse effects** — the lane-4 safety/teacher-flag core, as a set.
4. **Gamma & Metzinger (2021) MPE-92M** + **Hanley et al. (2018) NADA** + **Schmidt & Berkemeyer (2018) Altered States Database** — the calibration-battery shortlist for the top of the Wheel (lane 2, §7 battery slots).
5. **Sparby & Sacchet (2024) jhāna classification** + **Sparby & Sacchet (2025) advanced-meditation/human-development map** — the only teacher-anchored cartography for the 51+ Unbinding/Enlightenment band Waypoint must still recognize.
6. **The false-insight cluster: Grimmer et al. (2022), Laukkonen et al. (2020), McGovern et al. (2024)** — lane 5 anti-Goodhart empirical footing (conviction ≠ evidence).
7. **Ramstead et al. (2022) generative passages** + **Sandved-Smith et al. (2021) computational phenomenology of mental action** — the formal bridge from LLM-extracted markers to Bayesian latents; feeds the estimator design memo.
8. **Metzinger (2024) The Elephant and the Blind** — 500+ pure-awareness reports as raw marker-language material (and the contamination baseline).
9. **Ehmann et al. (2025) science of advanced meditation** — the current-state review that scopes what's measurable at Stages 4–6.
10. **Chowdhury et al. (2023) cessation EEG case study** — the intensive-single-subject method that legitimizes Waypoint's tiny-N longitudinal design.

**Deliberately NOT in the acquire list (and why):** the whole-brain-modeling machinery (Deco/Hopf, Schaefer/Yeo parcellation, criticality) is foundational to the seed papers' *methods* but off-scope for a language-based estimator; the sleep/lucidity, psychedelic-neuroimaging, and consciousness-theory-comparison (IIT/GNWS/HOT) clusters are construct-vocabulary at most. And per the network-overlap caveat: the highest-value *external* acquisitions are the out-of-network staging instruments the seed corpus never cites (Cook-Greuter SCT/ego-development, Hood M-scale, MODTAS, Jeffery Martin PNSE) — flagged here as a gap for lanes 1–2 to fill, not drawn from this map.

---

## Verification log

- ✅ **Sparby & Sacchet (2024)** — confirmed live: *Mindfulness* 15(6):1375–1394, DOI 10.1007/s12671-024-02367-w (Springer). Corpus note's "pp. 1–20" was a preprint approximation; corrected above.
- ✅ **Hanley, Nakamura & Garland (2018) NADA** — confirmed live: *Psychological Assessment* 30(12):1625–1639, DOI 10.1037/pas0000615 (PubMed 30058824 / PMC6265073).
- 🔷 **Gamma & Metzinger (2021) MPE-92M** — DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0253694 triangulated identical across 2 independent corpus notes; live search safeguard-flagged, not re-fetched. High confidence; confirm on pull.
- 🔷 **Ehmann et al. (2025)** and **Sparby & Sacchet (2025)** — **UNVERIFIED**: live searches safeguard-flagged; vol/pages from corpus notes only. Confirm DOI/metadata before citing in the dossier.
- All other entries transcribed from seed-paper printed reference lists (with DOIs) by the corpus readers; re-checked items were accurate. None invented.