Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 02:22:15 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 03:38:22 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 04:10:10 UTC

A.15.1:4.2 - Core occurrence references and neighboring links

When current Work also uses live steering. One current Work occurrence may enact both its domain Method and the A.15.7 steering Method, but only if each enactsMethod relation is independently grounded. Merely consulting the pattern or a MethodDescription, or admitting the steering Method as a submethod of a composite Method, proves neither enactment. The next-action answer says what should happen next; it neither creates another Work occurrence nor changes Work that has already occurred. Treat choosing as a smaller Work occurrence only when its own A.15.1 basis and its relation to the larger Work are both needed and grounded.

When a separate assertion or description episteme describes one Work occurrence, recover the following content at the granularity required by the current use. Each item names an occurrence designator, a world-side relation or temporal fact, or a reference to another episteme; the list is not a slot or field schema for the Work individual:

  1. Occurrence and extent — one occurrence designator plus exact start and end, or an explicitly open end for in-flight work; add location only when the work claim depends on it.
  2. Performer System and agency basis — for admission, name every actual performer U.System and its A.13 core, including the obtaining assignment for the action, scope, situation, and window. After Work admission, use F.6 only when the receiving claim needs the exact assignment under which that System performed the Work; keep the declared species, holder, other participants, and coverage recoverable.
  3. Enacted method — actual enactsMethod -> U.Method. Cite methodDescriptionRef -> U.MethodDescription only when the receiving claim depends on that exact description episteme; the description is not enacted.
  4. Containing Systems — name at least one locally declared Work-to-System predicate, its actual Work and U.System participants, and the exact system boundary and qualification window that make it obtain. Name several when different valid boundaries matter to the receiving use. A System’s part relation to a larger holon does not by itself establish another Work-containment relation.
  5. Work-to-referent relation used by the claim — name the declared domain predicate, its participant order, and the actual Work and referent participants only when that predicate obtains and the receiving claim uses it. “Work on X”, shared timing, a record mention, or a convenient affected field establishes no such relation. If the use needs the relation but no predicate governs it, keep the Work and referent and return missing-governor[work-to-referent]. An obtaining work-to-referent fact does not by itself assert change, production, delivery, or acceptance.
  6. Actual participation and bindings — for an operation argument or result, name one identified A.6.1 application and its exact declaration-local binding. For another participant, parameter, supplied constituent, premise, or reference use, name the declared subject predicate, participant order, and actual values. If the required route is absent, name the missing relation or binding in the missing-governor result rather than asserting it. A MethodDescription field, plan row, type-compatible value, or log token establishes none of them.
  7. Performed resource use — name the declared resource-use predicate and its actual Work, resource, amount, unit, and extent participants at the boundary needed by costing or sustainability use. If no predicate governs the needed use, return missing-governor[resource-use]; do not infer use from colocation, timing, or a plan estimate.
  8. Continuity policy for an unresolved segmentation — when a named identity, episode, retry, resumption, or aggregation use has more than one defensible segmentation, cite workContinuityPolicyRef to the exact C.2.1 episteme whose claims state the branch criterion and tolerances for that use, and interpret those claims under its effective U.ReferenceScheme. If the criterion or its applicability cannot be recovered, leave that segmentation unresolved. The episteme is a U.MethodDescription only if it independently satisfies A.3.2’s method-description criterion. A simple uninterrupted occurrence needs no continuity-policy reference; the policy supports a judgment about the occurrence and neither constitutes nor rewrites it.
  9. Work mereology and temporal relations — exact parent, part, predecessor, successor, overlap, retry, or resumption relations only when their predicates obtain.
  10. Actual change and production claims — identify each actual transformation independently under A.3.4; connect it to Work only through a declared domain predicate with its exact Work and transformation participants or a filled A.6.RCD disposition-2 claim with recoverable constructor, base predicates, participants, and case facts. Otherwise return missing-governor[work-to-change]. Keep the current A.15.PROD production-work, entity-identity-inception, and production-completion claims separate. None follows from work identity or parthood.
  11. Evaluation and downstream claims — use the one matching §4.6 row for evaluation work and result, evidence use, delivery or transfer, and acceptance; omit every row that is not current.
  12. Evidence, publication, and model use — cite only the exact evidence-use, publication-use, currentness, claim-scope, reference-plane, bridge, or selected model-use relation needed by the receiving claim.