inputLedger_nonempty
plain-language theorem explainer
The T−2..T5 input ledger is a non-empty list: the framework records named discrete structural choices rather than claiming zero inputs. Verification auditors cite this after the honesty pass that retired the vacuous zero-knobs certificate. The proof is a one-line simplification that unfolds the explicit five-entry list.
Claim. The enumerated input ledger for the $T_{-2}$ through $T_5$ layer is a non-empty list of named discrete modeling inputs.
background
The module replaces a former vacuous certificate (0 = 0) with an explicit ledger of every discrete modeling input, convention, and calibration consumed by the T−2..T5 forcing layer. "Zero adjustable parameters" holds only in the narrow sense that no continuous parameter is fit to data; discrete structural choices remain real inputs and are named.
The ledger is a concrete List of five LedgeredInput records. Each entry carries a short description, a kind tag (structural choice or bridge hypothesis), and the layer it feeds: observational distinguishability structure, marked pair for Boolean projection, Bool indicator with unit recognition cost, positive-ratio continuum carrier, and finite polynomial closure / composition law (C6).
Upstream, inputLedger is defined by that five-element list literal. Non-emptiness is the first audit fact about the ledger: the framework has inputs, and they are named (audit §11).
proof idea
One-line term proof. simp [inputLedger] unfolds the definition to the five-element list literal, which is definitionally unequal to []. No lemmas beyond definitional simplification are required.
why it matters
This is the first non-vacuous certificate in the knobs-count verification path. The 2026 honesty pass removed zero_knobs_policy : 0 = 0 because a reflexivity proof carried no information about framework inputs; the internal audit (Thapa, T−2..T5 forcing report, §11) flagged that gap.
Non-emptiness anchors the ledger story: Recognition Science does not claim zero inputs overall. It claims no fitted continuous parameters, while enumerating discrete structural choices that feed the forcing chain (T0 recognition work through T5 J-uniqueness and the composition law). Sibling results count the ledger and assert the continuous-parameter count is zero; this theorem only guarantees the ledger itself is inhabited.
No downstream theorems currently depend on it, but it is the natural precondition for any count or emptiness-sensitive audit over the same list.
Switch to Lean above to see the machine-checked source, dependencies, and usage graph.