A.15.8:6 - Worked cases

A.15.8:6.1 - Literature qualification across a researcher, services, and files

Situation. LiteratureQualificationWork-2026-08-27-AM is one admitted actual Work occurrence. Researcher-17 is first recovered as an actual performer through A.13, and A.15.1 admits the Work independently. This recovery account also compares accountability under one named assignment, so it separately establishes the exact A.2.1 occurrence and F.6 attribution; failure of that later relation would lower only the accountability attribution, not erase the Work. A search service, language-model service, repository, pinned papers, claim sheet, and unresolved-question note support the Work; none becomes a performer or constituent of a new whole merely by appearing in the configuration. A reviewer may continue later.

Probe. The fresh-session and reviewer-handoff probe removes the original model session and asks the reviewer to recover the bounded question, exact source editions, accepted and rejected claim reasons, open uncertainty, and next probe.

Observation and result. The reviewer can recover the papers but cannot distinguish why one claim was rejected because the claim sheet lacks a decision reason and one citation lacks an edition pin. The result focuses on the exact Work occurrence, identifies the missing source and record relations, and returns two repairs to their representation and source owners. The unsupported claim stops. No “extended researcher”, composite System, or researcher capability is inferred.

What changed. Repair the source pin and decision record before continuing; do not ask the person or model to “remember better”.

A.15.8:6.2 - Non-human distributed computation after worker loss

Situation. SettlementComputationWork-2026-08-27-Run42 is one admitted long-running computation Work occurrence. Its separately grounded performer Systems exchange messages and use an object store, configuration values, intermediate results, completed-effect records, and provenance records. Another worker must continue without duplicating an irreversible settlement effect.

Probe. RecoveryTestController-Run42 : U.System first has the A.13 core for the probe action; A.15.1 then independently admits WorkerLossRecoveryProbeWork-Run42-P1 : U.Work in the bounded representative environment. The recovery comparison expressly uses which controller assignment covered the probe, so the account separately establishes that A.2.1 occurrence and F.6 attribution through the same A.13 assignment. That probe Work enacts the selected computing U.Method: it removes one worker after a message has been emitted but before its local completion record is available, then attempts recovery from the selected state mechanism. If the F.6 link failed, the probe Work would remain and only its assignment-bound attribution would be unresolved.

Observation and result. Process state is recoverable, but channel state and the completed-effect provenance relation are not mutually consistent. The branch-specific account names those state bearers and update/use relations and returns the missing idempotency or provenance condition. A Chandy-Lamport snapshot, event sourcing, transaction protocol, or another computing Method may be selected as the reusable way for the repair. If the repair is carried out, an admitted System performs the dated repair Work and that Work may enact the selected Method; this pattern selects neither.

What changed. Add or repair the exact checkpoint, provenance, or idempotency condition. No human attention, memory faculty, or cognitive ontology enters.

A.15.8:6.3 - Equipped performer in a present WorkPlan

Situation. ConcertPerformancePlan-2026-09-12 is one exact present U.WorkPlan. Its declaration-local content names a musician and a robotic prosthesis controller as intended performers for a proposed performance after device replacement. It also names an instrument, cue source, power support, control link, and allowed latency. None of this content is a future Work occurrence or obtaining assignment.

Probe. The current plan proposes a rehearsal under changed latency and a degraded visual-cue condition. Its material, timing, control, threshold, and stop rules are taken from the applicable music-performance, robotics, human-factors, and safety Methods. If the rehearsal occurs, first recover each actual performer through A.13 and admit the actual Work independently under A.15.1. Add F.6 only if the receiving rehearsal account also consumes precise assignment-bound attribution; missing or failed F.6 leaves the rehearsal Work intact.

Observation and result. Current evidence does not support recovery after cue loss within the required timing window. The WorkPlan-focused account names the intended performers, support and control relations, return condition, uncertainty, and the planned probe. It returns a plan repair: restore a redundant cue/control relation or narrow the supported configuration. Capability claims for the musician, device, or any independently admitted whole stay separate.

What changed. Repair the proposed sensing, control, cue, or recovery relation before declaring entry readiness; do not infer one timeless capability holder.