This paper operates within the transcendental tradition in philosophy of science, analyzing not what empirically occurs in self-optimizing systems, but what must be presupposed for the question of structural recovery to be intelligible. It formalizes a conditional impossibility: under fixed-structure constraints, internal recovery of lost structural coherence is not merely difficult, but conceptually incoherent This preprint introduces a conceptual framework for understanding structural limits in self-optimizing systems. The central result (Theorem 1) is intentionally tautological: it formalizes the conditions under which structural recovery becomes impossible under fixed-structure constraints. The paper argues that optimization presupposes structural sufficiency (N₁) that cannot be generated by optimization alone (N₀). This is developed through: A formal statement of conditional irrecoverability- Application to neural network pruning- Analogical extensions to biological, cognitive, and social systems- Discussion of implications for philosophy of science and AI The result is not an empirical discovery but a conceptual boundary marker: it clarifies when claims of "self-recovery" implicitly assume external structural support.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Claudio Bresciano
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Claudio Bresciano (Sat,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69926552eb1f82dc367a1444 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18644522
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: