Why it is a question
A14 §2: “Preserving the existence of a reconstruction is different from preserving the feasibility of that reconstruction.” Even if every step of A₀ → A₁ → … → Aₙ preserves enough to reconstruct the previous one, “the cost of reconstructing the original justification can grow as the transformations accumulate.” It separated logical, computational and epistemic recoverability.
A14 offered it as “an additional interpretation of the drift described in CLAIM-191”, and said “Whether it explains the observed exchanges is still open.” The record’s own case, the will exchange of ADR-032, is where it would be checked: were the drifted concepts recoverable from the transcript, and at what cost?
An answer either exhibits growth of reconstruction cost along a chain of individually invertible restatements, or shows the drift the record documents was loss and not cost.