A binary relation on a set is a well-founded relation if every nonempty subset has an -minimal member, that is, a member with no predecessor inside that subset. Here write when .
Suppose is well-founded and fix any . Call a partial function consistent if is downward closed under and for . Two consistent partial functions agree on their common domain: otherwise the set of points where they disagree has a minimal member, all of whose predecessors are in both domains and agree, so applying gives agreement at that member as well, a contradiction. Thus the union of all consistent partial functions is itself a function , on a downward-closed domain, and remains consistent. This union is a set, because every such graph is a subset of .
If , choose a minimal member of . All predecessors of lie in , so extend to by the prescribed value . The enlarged domain remains downward closed and consistent, contradicting the union's maximality. Hence . The same minimal-disagreement argument proves uniqueness. This establishes the required recursion directly, without invoking an unproved well-founded recursion theorem.
Conversely, if is not well-founded, choose a nonempty such that each has a predecessor in . Let be all points reachable from by a finite chain of upward steps, including . Then
For a point reached by a nonempty chain, its preceding point is in ; for a point of , use its predecessor in . The converse follows by appending the final step to a chain. Choose and if , zero otherwise. Both and satisfy the required recursion, and they differ because . This contradicts recursiveness. Therefore is recursive exactly when its predecessor relation is well-founded, the characterization of a recursive powerset mapping.