Technical Audit of Visual Clinical Tests Under a Retina-Centric Model (RCM) Implications for Diagnostic Causality and Retinal–Cortical Differentiation

This technical report presents a systematic audit of traditional visual clinical tests under a Retina-Centric Model (RCM) of visual processing. While classical diagnostic instruments are effective at detecting visual dysfunction, their interpretation has historically relied on cortex-centric assumptions in which the retina is treated as a passive sensor and the brain as an image-reconstructing processor. Under the Retina-Centric Model, the retina is instead understood as an active neural system that performs early feature extraction through photochemical cascades and layered retinal circuitry, while cortical areas integrate pre-processed features rather than reconstructing pixel-based images. When this framework is applied, a fundamental causal indeterminacy emerges in the interpretation of visual test outcomes: abnormal results may originate from retinal preprocessing, cortical integration, or both. This report identifies and systematizes four recurrent failure points in traditional clinical interpretation: (1) mislocalization of causal origin, (2) temporal misattribution between retinal latency and cognitive processing speed, (3) energetic implausibility of cortical image reconstruction, and (4) unaccounted photo-chemical stress effects during visual testing. These issues are analyzed using established physical, metabolic, and bandwidth constraints, without introducing new experimental data. Importantly, this document does not invalidate existing visual clinical tests. Instead, it proposes a reinterpretation of their results under a retina-centric causal framework and outlines a differentiation protocol to distinguish retinal from cortical contributions using established assessment tools. This report complements the previously published Retina-Centric Model (RCM) by explicitly anticipating its diagnostic implications and by documenting a prior, formal analysis of how acceptance of active retinal preprocessing necessitates a reassessment of visual test interpretation.