Psychedelics × Rhythm: audit the causal bridge from synchrony to communitas

Audit three primary studies cited by the OpenLabs rhythm project and determine whether they support its proposed interaction between rhythmic synchrony and psychedelic group experience. Deliver a traceable claim audit and a precise account of what its proposed comparison can establish.

The fixed context is the project's June 11, 2026 post, which proposes that synchronized rhythmic activity increases communitas during group psychedelic experiences, predicts an effect greater than the additive contributions of rhythm and psychedelics, and discusses interpersonal neural synchrony. It suggests three groups: psychedelic plus synchronized activity, psychedelic plus non-synchronized music, and psychedelic plus silence.

Audit four claims: C1 the communitas study establishes an association with later wellbeing/social connectedness and identifies communitas as the strongest predictor beyond mystical experience; C2 dance studies isolate synchrony effects from exertion and establish social bonding; C3 these studies directly establish a shared neural or endorphin mechanism; C4 the combined literature or proposed three-group comparison establishes a greater-than-additive rhythm × psychedelic interaction. The claims are propositions to assess, not required conclusions.

This is evidence validation and identification analysis, not a clinical study design or advice to conduct sessions. Evaluate C1's component assertions separately where their support differs.

Submit both required files as bytes in the Submission. Source links are references, not replacements for files.

• study-evidence.csv: exactly one row per required study, with source_id, study_design, sample_size_and_analysis_population, exposure_or_manipulation, comparator, outcome_measures, followup, key_results, reported_uncertainty, causal_limits, source_locators. Include the measured social outcome and at least one relevant numerical result per study as reported in text/tables; explain what each number represents. Do not estimate numerical values from graphs.
• audit.md: 1000–1500 words excluding references/tables, containing a C1–C4 verdict matrix using supported/partially-supported/unsupported/contradicted with an explanation and source locations; a comparison of the actual populations and outcomes; and an identification note. The note must describe which contrast the proposed three groups can estimate, identify any absent comparison needed for a greater-than-additive interaction, and state a symbolic contrast for that interaction with every symbol defined. Explain why existing published summary results do or do not supply that contrast. Include three ranked corrections to the project argument, each with a defensible replacement statement and the evidence that would permit a stronger claim. Add full citations, URLs, article publication dates, access dates, and any material internal discrepancies.

The corpus is closed to the three original studies below. Their cited background papers do not count as measurements made in these studies. No new literature search or participant-level reanalysis is required. Missing information must be labeled, not inferred as zero or filled with invented participants/results.

Required corpus: these published studies in the PMC full-text versions publicly available September 22, 2026. Their article identities and publication years govern; later revisions/new evidence are outside this comparison. PMC is the public archival location for the judging window.

• S1: Kettner et al. (2021), *Psychedelic Communitas: Intersubjective Experience During Psychedelic Group Sessions Predicts Enduring Changes in Psychological Wellbeing and Social Connectedness*: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8114773/
• S2: Tarr et al. (2015), *Synchrony and exertion during dance independently raise pain threshold and encourage social bonding*: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4650190/
• S3: Tarr et al. (2016), *Silent disco: dancing in synchrony leads to elevated pain thresholds and social closeness*: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4985033/

Background project: https://openlabs-git-codex-openlabs-elgora-adapter-bio-xyz.vercel.app/projects/68892a4b-8503-480f-a8c1-085817a0e958 . Background post: https://openlabs-git-codex-openlabs-elgora-adapter-bio-xyz.vercel.app/post/e2c2f91a-4a85-4f25-86f7-55dfaeaf7347 . The frozen context above governs if the mutable pages change.

Among entries satisfying every acceptance criterion, compare in this priority order: (1) accuracy and traceability of the claim audit; (2) correctness and explicitness of the interaction identification analysis; (3) usefulness of the corrections, meaning their replacement wording is specific and their evidence gaps would change the stated conclusion. Prefer the stronger entry on the first priority with a material difference. Remaining ties go to the earlier on-chain Submission, then lower Submission ID for equal timestamps. If one entry qualifies it wins; if none qualifies the outcome is no_valid_submission.

Drug-use advice, dosage recommendations, participant recruitment, clinical or breathwork protocols, new psychedelic/dance sessions, simulated empirical results, EEG processing, and treatment recommendations are outside scope.