Admissibility under Declared Transformations: Invariant Verdicts, Compatible Quotients, and Resolution Limits

Abstract What must a declared representation preserve for judgments to remain invariant under redescription and transformation? This paper gives exact conditions for compatible representations and identifies the obstruction when those conditions cannot be jointly satisfied. For a declared equivalence R and an observation kernel K, the eligible representations are exactly the equivalences E satisfying R ⊆ E ⊆ K. They exist precisely when R ⊆ K and then form a complete lattice in their induced order. Requiring compatibility with a transformation catalogue narrows this family to an interval of congruences between the least catalogue congruence containing R and contextual indistinguishability Θ. Existence is equivalent to R ⊆ Θ; uniqueness holds exactly when the endpoints coincide. Nonexistence has a finite-context witness: a declared-interchangeable pair whose observations differ after a finite sequence of transformations. Effective verification requires separately stated presentation assumptions. The paper also distinguishes named-action descent, may/must abstraction and path lifting; separates preservation from authorization; and shows why sound admissibility rules need not be deviation thresholds. For finite conflict orders, order-representable resolutions correspond to linear extensions, equivalently maximal chains of the ideal lattice, rather than to its individual elements. These results characterize compatibility and its limits under explicit declarations. They do not establish unrestricted decidability, computational affordability, physical correspondence or a uniquely forced architecture. This paper supersedes A Forcing Theorem for Admissibility Under Transformation (2026). Appendix A records the predecessor’s claims and their dispositions. This version replaces the forced-architecture interpretation with explicitly scoped compatibility, invariance and obstruction results. The accompanying verification supplement contains executable checks, recorded outputs, the editable source and a payload manifest.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-09-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21003891
Primary Topic
Game Theory and Voting Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Admissibility under Declared Transformations: Invariant Verdicts, Compatible Quotients, and Resolution Limits

Devin Bostick
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Game Theory and Voting Systems
article

Admissibility under Declared Transformations: Invariant Verdicts, Compatible Quotients, and Resolution Limits

Devin Bostick
article en

Abstract

Abstract What must a declared representation preserve for judgments to remain invariant under redescription and transformation? This paper gives exact conditions for compatible representations and identifies the obstruction when those conditions cannot be jointly satisfied. For a declared equivalence R and an observation kernel K, the eligible representations are exactly the equivalences E satisfying R ⊆ E ⊆ K. They exist precisely when R ⊆ K and then form a complete lattice in their induced order. Requiring compatibility with a transformation catalogue narrows this family to an interval of congruences between the least catalogue congruence containing R and contextual indistinguishability Θ. Existence is equivalent to R ⊆ Θ; uniqueness holds exactly when the endpoints coincide. Nonexistence has a finite-context witness: a declared-interchangeable pair whose observations differ after a finite sequence of transformations. Effective verification requires separately stated presentation assumptions. The paper also distinguishes named-action descent, may/must abstraction and path lifting; separates preservation from authorization; and shows why sound admissibility rules need not be deviation thresholds. For finite conflict orders, order-representable resolutions correspond to linear extensions, equivalently maximal chains of the ideal lattice, rather than to its individual elements. These results characterize compatibility and its limits under explicit declarations. They do not establish unrestricted decidability, computational affordability, physical correspondence or a uniquely forced architecture. This paper supersedes A Forcing Theorem for Admissibility Under Transformation (2026). Appendix A records the predecessor’s claims and their dispositions. This version replaces the forced-architecture interpretation with explicitly scoped compatibility, invariance and obstruction results. The accompanying verification supplement contains executable checks, recorded outputs, the editable source and a payload manifest.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
Game Theory and Voting Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.