This framework identifies key constitutional primitives influencing replay-authoritative legitimacy governance.
This paper examines whether Constitutional Replay-Authority systems depend upon a small set of irreducible constitutional primitives. Building on prior work defining Constitutional Replay, Computational Legitimacy, and the Computational Legitimacy Gap, the paper proposes a framework for identifying primitives that govern the creation, preservation, and evaluation of replay-authoritative legitimacy. Using criteria including non-derivability, constitutional necessity, governance function, and failure uniqueness, the analysis evaluates key concepts within the Constitutional Replay architecture. The paper identifies Authority Origination, Authority Singularity, Governance Freezing, Explicit Materialization, Fail-Closed Design, and Legitimacy State Theory as foundational constitutional primitives and examines their relationships within a broader legitimacy-governance hierarchy. The results suggest that Constitutional Replay-Authority constitutes a distinct infrastructure category centered on governing the conditions under which computational legitimacy may be authoritatively established, denied, and preserved.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Larry Otto (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: