Recursive Anticipatory Argumentation-Control Theory (RAACT)

This paper proposes Recursive Anticipatory Argumentation-Control Theory (RAACT),an interdisciplinary framework for representing argumentative discourse as a dynamic, par-tially observed, and recursively updated interaction system. Its central mechanism, Recur-sive Anticipatory Argument-Path Interception (RAAPI), combines contextual observation,pragmatic-linguistic encoding, argument reconstruction, opponent-state estimation, proba-bilistic argument-path forecasting, formal refutation verification, anticipatory intervention,and feedback-based model revision.The framework is developed around the Pre-emptive Refutation Fork Case (PRFC), aprimary analytical case in which one participant forecasts an opponent's possible argumenta-tive move and presents a logically evaluated counterargument before that move is explicitlyadvanced. Subsequent responses are classified into continuation, substitution, qualification,forecast challenge, clarification, and novel argumentative pathways.The mathematical specification introduces latent-state models, observation functions,categorical predictive distributions, Bayesian belief updating, intervention-utility functions,estimation errors, and forecast-evaluation metrics. Conditional mathematical propositionsidentify what can be established under explicit assumptions, while empirical hypotheses dis-tinguish predictive accuracy from intervention effectiveness and strategic response restriction.RAACT is presented as a formal theoretical architecture and a research program, not asan empirically validated universal law. Its principal scientific obligations are to demonstrateincremental predictive value, establish causal effects under an identifiable research design,prove specific mathematical claims under stated assumptions, and identify boundary conditionsthrough counterexamples and independent replication.