That's been my impression of Stephen Wolfram and what he does in general. He has some accomplishments but his ego is comically large by comparison with those. Very hard to take him seriously.
To be charitable, if he had some way to mathematically slide between and combine networks of cellular automata, he might have something, but it would probably just end up reinventing deep learning and neural nets on a slightly different set of primitives.
This discussion between the CEO of NKN and Wolfram is pretty good. [0]
I am not saying it is the most important thing happening in "multicomputation" but I think there's a lot that this approach can lead to when we start talking about using clusters of computers, GPUs, TPUs, cell phones, edge devices, etc in a secure fashion. I think there's something to it, but I am also an idiot and could be very wrong.
[0] https://medium.com/nknetwork/stephen-wolfram-creator-of-nks-...
I mean, you could at least read a bit about what his Multicomputation stuff is really studying. CA are not being noodled there.
And that's it. It's not very deep, and nobody outside his sphere of influence uses this term for that purpose.
The thing with Stephen Wolfram is that he invents all those terms, uses them as if they are standard terminology in the field (of physics or computer science) while freely mixing them with _actual_ standard terminology. That goes for "branchial graph", "rurial space", "principle of computational equivalence" and also "multicomputation". He is just diving deeper and deeper into his own buzzwordial space.
An author who sets a piece up like that had better deliver the goods - big time. The author does not. You might expect that "new paradigm" of his to have rocked the scientific world. It hasn't.
The big idea is: "Multicomputation." And despite voluminous writing on the topic it's nothing more than noodling cellular automata in ways that have had no effect whatsoever on chemistry, physics, or biology.