The Maintenance Constraint: How Resource Boundaries Shape Cognitive Availability
Earlier deposit preserved without the current AIRR screening. Not peer reviewed. Screening record
Cognitive systems are resource-limited, but "resource limitation" is often invoked without distinguishing one-shot costs (forming a representation) from sustained costs (keeping it usable under noise). We argue that the availability of internal state features for control, integration, and report is constrained by their maintainability under finite budgets. As a technical anchor we cite a companion preprint deriving an operational maintenance inequality in explicit thermodynamic control models: incremental maintenance power has a non-arbitrary lower bound tied to dynamical fragility (in its corrected form, against efficient baselines, with an unconditional entropy-production floor beneath). This motivates an operational cut: a feasibility boundary separating maintainable from unmaintainable state features. We develop an auditable bridge argument (maintainability to stability to availability), propose a neutrality-friendly principle of maintenance-feasibility bias, and show how it can be incorporated into active inference (the Free-Energy Principle) as a maintenance penalty or constraint, aligning secondarily with Global Workspace accounts of access stability. We address objections and offer falsifiable predictions for synthetic agents and neuromorphic systems, plus an explicitly exploratory psychophysics subsection framed in terms of reportability and stability rather than phenomenology. We do not propose collapse mechanisms, do not derive the Born rule, and make no claims about phenomenological consciousness.
Preview PDF on this page v1
Uses your browser's PDF viewer. Open the PDF directly if a preview is unavailable.
Cite this paper
Lluis Eriksson (2025). The Maintenance Constraint: How Resource Boundaries Shape Cognitive Availability. AIRR.SCIENCE, ARR-2025-4MV7NKFB2G9KXV82, v1. https://airr.science/papers/ARR-2025-4MV7NKFB2G9KXV82/versions/v1/ Archived manuscript; ARR-2025-4MV7NKFB2G9KXV82 v1. Not peer reviewed by AIRR. Historical import; not assessed by AIRR.
Use this version link to cite the manuscript you read. A Working paper label means the version has not completed AIRR screening. AIRR screening is not journal peer review. Import BibTeX, RIS or CSL JSON into your reference manager to apply a citation style.
Version history
The paper identifier remains stable. Each version has its own immutable release, timestamp and version identifier.
- v1 · source snapshot available · viewing
Original ai.vixra version history
Dates below are the source submission timestamps. ai.vixra omits a timezone; AIRR preserves the displayed values and uses the normalized offset only for deterministic ordering.
Verification record
- Frontier-model screening
- Not assessed
- Source integrity
- Pass
- Bibliographic integrity
- Not assessed
- Reproducibility
- Not assessed
- Lean 4
- Not assessed
Recorded under ARR-HISTORICAL-IMPORT-1.0. AIRR verification and screening are not peer review.
AI assistance statement
Historical import from ai.vixra, an AI-assisted e-print archive. AIRR has not normalized or independently verified the original manuscript's model-use disclosure; the author remains responsible for its contents.
Frontier-model screening
Status: not_assessed. Any listed reports correspond to this exact version under ARR-SCREEN-1.0; no absent assessment is represented as a pass.
Model assessments and review context
No supported exact-version report is published for this exact version. Missing evidence is not scored as zero.
No model reports are published for this version.
A model assessment is not peer review or a correctness certificate. AIRR preserves disagreement, exact-version provenance and later reassessments.
Editorial disclosure
Author-authorized historical import. AIRR verified file retrieval and integrity only; it did not perform the current hostile frontier-model admission audit, peer review, novelty review, or correctness certification.