Operational Inexpressibility at the Step-Duplicating Primitive Recursor Orientation Boundary

Abstract

We identify a structural property of term-rewriting proof systems called operational inexpressibility: no derivation depends on a specified input dimension and also constrains the target question. The canonical instance is direct aggregation on the primitive recursion duplicator F(x,y,Z) x, F(x,y,S(n)) G(y,F(x,y,n)), where the step argument y is duplicated on the right. Under any direct whole-term measure the recursor's mass profile coincides with that of a true circular reference; the boundary operator's channel-preservation axiom and the dependency-pair soundness license separate them. Sound responses split into construction methods (polynomial interpretations, path orderings) extending the proof language, and confession methods (dependency pairs, counter-projection, size-change termination, argument filtering) projecting away the unincorporable dimension under external license; all four share a projection rank and certified-forgetting interface. Arts-Giesl soundness is Π02-combinatorial, formalizable in IΣ1, with an artifact-facing ω3 termination measure inside RCA0, far below the 0-scale of classical Gödelian reflection. The confessed burden grows quadratically across the canonical trace while residual proof work grows linearly. An architectural necessity theorem shows that any first-order step rule emitting a per-step record frame while preserving its generator must duplicate. A Layer-Crossing-Under-External-License (LCEL) schema places the confession in the Feferman-Beklemishev reflection family rather than the Lawvere-Yanofsky diagonal family, recovering the six-step structural identity with Gödel 1931 as a specialization. A witness-language hierarchy with minimal order κ identifies the boundary as κ(x)>0.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…