I hope you dont mind but Im gonna send in one more response to this!! I would love for you to elaborate further on " -how reality is experienced and how facts themselves are constituted." and " - how far that transformation should be taken when we talk about reality itself. " I am looking forward to reading your paper later on so I can get a better grasp on exactly what your trying to articulate but I am open for a little more explanation if you would so like!!
Facts themselves are composed through social interaction, language, and cultural framework, turning shared meanings into subjective realities. Ultimately, the human experience of reality is an interplay between the physical world around us and the mental and social structures we dictate around it, often resulting in a shared, rather than absolute, truth.
On the note of "- It suggests that “reality” might not be fully real until there’s a certain structural correlation between the observer and what is being observed. " stated in your original post, It makes me think of the schrodinger's cat - thought experience.
Considering the nature of your original post Im sure your aware of it but for anyone scrolling by reading my comment it was preformed be a physicist, Erwin schrodinger. It was based around quantum superposition (the condition in which a quantum system can exist in multiple states simultaneously) and essentially was used to illustrate that until observed, an object could exists in two states, until we witness it and its forced to a collapse into a single state for the observer.
Back to the original post, The form quantum superposition collapses into is decided by interaction with the external environment (Supposedly, I had to research that one) and the collapse represents the transition from potentiality to actuality, driven by probability rather than determinism. If thats the case most Quantum mechanic's operates within, I personally can comfortably associate that to the idea of human conception of reality.
Interaction with the environment, a question specifically, can decide how matter collapses in regards to revealing something physically. My final question is what is the true difference between bringing something into reality, and revealing it? There is a probability for all things, no matter how finite, and what evidently becomes represented is shaped by our actions, and our questions.