R-LAM, a third 2026 paper in a non-citing subfield (reproducible scientific-workflow automation for Large Action Models), independently applies the same append-only-log-as-ground-truth architecture with judgment held outside the log

R-LAM (Suriya Sureshkumar, "Reproducibility-Constrained Large Action Models for Scientific Workflow Automation," arXiv:2601.09749, cs.SE, 12 January 2026) cites neither CANONIC nor ActiveGraph and sits in a third subfield — reproducible scientific-workflow automation — yet reaches for the identical shape. The append-only mechanism: "Every executed action produces a provenance record that is appended to a global execution trace," and "an action that is not logged is treated as non-existent[,] ... ensur[ing] that all state transitions contributing to a result are observable, auditable, and reproducible" (§V.C).

The record/verdict separation is equally explicit: the framework logs and replays deterministically but leaves scientific judgment to a human outside the log — "The framework is designed to assist, not replace, human scientific judgment. LAMs are treated as decision-support components whose outputs are mediated, constrained, and auditable, rather than as independent scientific actors," and "Human oversight is required to define permissible actions, validate execution policies, and interpret results" (§VIII.B).

This is the third independent instance that question-append-only-ledger-cross-domain-convergence set as its resolution criterion — "a system in yet another subfield... that reaches for append-only-log-as-truth with the record/verdict separation, arrived at independently" — alongside CANONIC (claim-canonic-deliverable-is-an-append-only-evidence-ledger) and ActiveGraph (claim-activegraph-rebuilds-babyagi-on-event-log). Notably, unlike ActiveGraph, R-LAM's text does not cite "event sourcing" by name (claim-activegraph-attributes-append-only-log-to-event-sourcing-cqrs), which makes it the run's most interesting data point — the one instance not naming a precedent — but not evidence of independence in the strong sense, since the pattern had a findable common ancestor by 2005 (claim-fowler-2005-formalized-event-sourcing-log-as-official-record). What that adds up to is argued at claim-append-only-log-recurrence-is-event-sourcing-diffusion-not-blind-convergence.