Operational Identity: A Finite Audit of Declared and Implemented Rules of Sameness
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A record system declares when two records refer to the same entity, occurrence, scope, or rule. Its disclosed implementation mechanisms induce a corresponding operational identity relation. The declared and implemented relations may diverge systematically without producing a provenance gap or detectable contradiction. A system can apply, consistently and with every record individually correct, a rule of sameness that no artifact declares. This paper formalizes that implemented relation. A declared identity regime partitions a finite record domain into co-reference classes; a disclosed mechanism, through its typed identity-relevant outcomes, induces an operational identity partition of the same domain. The audit compares these partitions in the refinement lattice. A mechanism is faithful when the declared partition refines the operational partition, so no declared class is split. A divergence witness is a pair the declaration merges and the mechanism separates; such witnesses are decidable by pair enumeration. When an imported sibling basis also splits a declared class, local comparison with its partition yields sibling-aligned, sub-sibling, super-sibling, or sibling-incomparable divergence. This result reports only the relationship; it does not identify the basis carried by the mechanism. Global equality of the operational and sibling partitions is defined separately as regime substitution and does not follow from sibling alignment. A version field incremented on every textual edit inhabits the sub-sibling case by splitting declared classes more finely than either imported basis. The audit is three-valued and relative to the disclosed artifacts, evaluated surfaces, and identified uses; each boundary has a finite refuting witness. A passing verdict is non-monotone because extending the transformation history can merge declared classes and create a witness among records already examined.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Jul 2026.
Builds on
13 of 38 references.
References · 13
- 2025PROV-AGENT: Unified Provenance for Tracking AI Agent Interactions in Agentic Workflowscited by 29
- 2026The 2025 AI Agent Index: Documenting Technical and Safety Features of Deployed Agentic AI Systemscited by 27
- 2026Auditable Agentscited by 14
- 2026Audit Trails for Accountability in Large Language Modelscited by 10
- 2025A Trustworthiness-based Metaphysics of Artificial Intelligence Systemscited by 6
- 2026AI Identity: Standards, Gaps, and Research Directions for AI Agentscited by 5
- 2026High-Risk AI Systems and the Problem of Identity in the European AI Actcited by 4
- 2026Responsible Agentic AI Requires Explicit Provenancecited by 3
- 2026A Category Theory Account of AI Identitycited by 2
- 2026Neutral Substrates: A Design Constraint for Shared Records Under Persistent Interpretive Disagreementcited by 1
- 2026Referential Regimes: Transformation-Invariant Identity for Neutral Substratescited by 1
- 2026Superintelligence and Lawcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.