Structuristics: A Formal Field for the Study of Constructive and Decompositional Dynamics Across Domains, Substrates, and Scales

This work introduces Structuristics as a research program concerned with identifying the structural conditions required for organized persistence across domains. The central hypothesis is that coupled operations of Construction and Decomposition (C/D) constitute a necessary structural condition for systems that produce and maintain organized structure, independent of substrate, scale, or domain. The framework emerges from a traceable derivation chain: CAMAF establishes criteria for distinguishing fact from opinion in representational systems; the Moura Fundamental Principle of Intelligence (FPI) identifies C/D as a minimal condition in systems considered intelligent; Structuristics extends this question to persistence itself, treating intelligence as a special case within a broader structural class. A formal metric, Decompositional Integrity (I_D), is defined as the normalized distance between a structure and its reconstruction after decomposition. From this, a three-regime structure is derived using domain-calibrated thresholds. Version 1.3.0 establishes that this domain-calibration is not a methodological convenience but a geometric necessity: in any domain where C operates recursively to sufficient density, the generated structures establish internal criteria of proximity and distance through operational closure, making a global Euclidean metric structurally impossible. The universality resides in the principle that produces the variation, not in the variation itself. The framework is instantiated across multiple domains, including physical dissipative systems, morphogenetic processes, ecosystems, legal corpora, scientific fields, pedagogical systems, musical structures, linguistic systems, large language models, galactic rotation curves, narrative knowledge systems, and political social systems. An independently developed result, the EML operator (Odrzywolek, arXiv:2603.21852), provides a formal confirmation within a closed domain that the absence of a decomposition-equivalent component leads to structural incompleteness. This constitutes a confirmed instance of Prediction 0 of this program, without implying a general proof of C/D duality. Version 1.3.0 incorporates an updated analysis of the RENS framework (Solazzo 2026), a theory of knowledge developed independently through hermeneutics and clinical psychology that identifies structurally correspondent operators under different names. The convergence between two independent derivation paths reaching the same formal operator is presented as candidate structural evidence, not as endorsement. Solazzo's observation that each Super-Semiotic Density Node generates its own internal proximity criteria through operational closure provides independent identification of the geometric argument formalised in this version. Version 1.3.0 also introduces the Babel Argument as a new Collective-class candidate for political social systems. The argument establishes that semantic invariance of foundational operators is a necessary condition for the Decomposition operator to function in any system operating under a written social contract with a declared modification procedure. The structural distinction between jurisprudential drift, where the text remains as a recoverable reference, and the Babel condition, where foundational terms are operationally redefined without declared procedure, is formalised with regime analysis and falsifiable predictions. The analysis is substrate-independent and does not reference any specific country, regime, ideology, or belief system. A defining methodological feature of this work is the requirement that every operational formal expression is accompanied by algorithmic prose. This consists of explicit procedural descriptions of what each expression computes, what each term represents, how the operation is applied step by step, and how its output is interpreted. This requirement is not motivated by accessibility alone, but by three structural conditions: (1) compliance with the CAMAF principle of traceability, which requires that no transformation remain implicit; (2) the transdomain scope of the framework, which includes fields that do not rely on mathematical notation; and (3) a methodological commitment that the ability to decompose a knowledge structure should not depend on prior credentialing in any formal system. This work is positioned within a broader effort to promote the structural opening of knowledge. It argues that the value of a scientific work lies not in its institutional context of production, but in the degree to which its claims are traceable, auditable, and reconstructible by independent agents. The availability of open-access infrastructures enables the publication of works that prioritize these criteria, even when they diverge from conventional editorial standards. The objective is not to replace existing scientific institutions, but to propose stricter structural criteria for knowledge production, in which formal compression and procedural decomposability are treated as epistemologically equivalent representations of the same operations. This document was produced under the CAMAF Scientific Production Methodology (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19325926). Keywords: Structuristics; decompositional integrity; structural regimes; constructive-decompositional dynamics; CAMAF; FPI; galactic rotation curves; RENS; Babel argument; political social systems; non-Euclidean metrics; algorithmic prose