This paper derives decision principles from the structural framework of La Profílée. Decision is not treated as optimization under uncertainty, but as action under constrained future possibility and persistence conditions. The central result is a derivation of exactly four minimal structurally forced decision regimes from two binary, independent structural questions. The derivation parallels the Q1–Q3 exhaustivity argument of Paper 111: the two decision questions QD1 and QD2 are jointly exhaustive and pairwise independent, yielding a 2×2 partition of the decision space into four irreducible regimes. Each regime carries a specific admissibility constraint on action, derived from the persistence condition IR ≤ 1 and the integration trajectory TI. The result establishes decision as navigation under structural constraint — not maximization of expected outcomes.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Marc Maibom
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Marc Maibom (Sat,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69e5c3ce03c293991402987b — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19645227
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: