This paper examines what any theory must minimally preserve if it claims to explain the attainment of structural existence without presupposing constituted spacetime, already individuated physical objects, or already available observational frameworks. The problem is pre-physical in a precise sense: it arises before one is entitled to assume the standard conditions under which ordinary physical description proceeds, and it therefore bears directly on background-independent approaches to quantum gravity and quantum cosmology. The governing claim is that any such theory must satisfy four minimal explanatory conditions; otherwise it does not treat structural existence as genuinely attained within process, but only as tacitly secured, belatedly displayed, or retrospectively classified. The argument develops the four conditions cumulatively. First, structural existence must be treated as a genuine result within process rather than as a hidden admissibility condition: process must bear attainment rather than merely display what was already protected. Second, failed attainment must remain internal to the same process rather than be externalized or dissolved into mere delay: without this internal contrast-space, attainment itself collapses back into tacit admissibility. Third, structural existence, unresolved process, and failed attainment must remain genuinely distinct and consequential statuses: unresolvedness cannot function as an indefinite shelter immunizing the theory against the real possibility of non-attainment. Fourth, those statuses must become processually determinable by virtue of some internal threshold structure: status-attribution cannot remain floating, retrospective, or purely classificatory at the generative level. The paper works with a minimal generative vocabulary of rhythm, phase, and direction. These terms are not introduced as parallel independent attributes but as a unified conceptual structure with an internal order of dependence: rhythm is the foundational process-character of an event; phase is rhythm's own internal state; direction is rhythm's extension tendency as an intrinsic relational orientation. This structure has a further implication: logical steps in any generative process are constrained by the period of the maximum rhythm among participating events, which suggests a pressure toward bounded propagation and bounded step-structure under any viable realization rather than amounting, in the present paper, to a derivation of physical constants or a completed physical theory. The paper then introduces closure and freezing as one local realization of the fourth condition within the GOCD framework. Closure names the processual securing of structural existence through the convergence of phase differences to within the tolerance determined by the minimum generative rhythm. Freezing names the retention of that secured standing through the stabilization of directional organization across logical steps. These notions are introduced not as the general thesis but as a demonstrative model showing one way in which the fourth condition can be concretely discharged. The overall contribution is therefore a restrained philosophical assessment framework for distinguishing genuine generative explanation from tacit presupposition, indefinite protection, and external classification. The argument does not proceed by inferring the four conditions from the success of this local model; rather, it first identifies public explanatory burdens and only then shows how one local realization may answer them.
Li et al. (Sun,) studied this question.