MATH.11:4.3 - Derive and solve the preservation equations
For every rule T, calculate I(T(x))-I(x) in the chosen arithmetic. Require it to be zero wherever that step is allowed.
For a rule given as a relation, use I(y)-I(x) on its allowed pairs. A finite relation supplies one equation per pair; a supplied parameterization gives expressions to substitute. If neither is available, obtaining a usable description of those pairs is the missing construction.
For additive count changes, this gives one linear equation on the weights per change. Solve the equations jointly. If all weights must be zero, this family supplies no distinguishing weighted total.
For polynomial updates and a rational-coefficient polynomial family, expand the difference and collect like monomials. Setting every resulting coefficient to zero gives a linear system in the unknown ci. Solving it constructs polynomial identities that preserve I for every input. On a state set or enabled region smaller than the full polynomial domain, this identity test is sufficient but can be stronger than the preservation actually required. A relation valid only on the reachable states may therefore need another construction.
For example, let X={0,1}, T(x)=x² and I(x)=c*x+d. Requiring the polynomial identity c*(x²-x)=0 over all rational x forces c=0. On X the two allowed pairs are 0→0 and 1→1; checking them admits I(x)=x. Starting at 0, this invariant excludes 1. Here inspecting the allowed pairs produces a useful invariant within the same linear family.
The simultaneous equations can be solved by substitution in a small case or by linear algebra for a larger one. If several independent solutions are useful, keep them together as a tuple of invariants. A constant solution can be discarded for a target-separation question because it has the same value at every state.
If a tool proposes coefficients, substitute the resulting expression into the original rules. This confirms the identity and the arithmetic to which it applies. A few numerical trials can reveal an error; a proof for all allowed steps needs the corresponding algebraic argument or an exhaustive finite check.