A.15:5 - Archetypal Grounding

Use this alignment whenever the live question joins a holder system, exact local system-role kind, assignment occurrence, Method, plan, capability, or performed Work. Physical engineering, knowledge work, and socio-technical work can use the same distinctions without turning A.15 into a universal process ontology.

Boundary case — possessed algorithm versus enacted Method. Robot-7 : U.System is classified under InspectorSystemRole and is the holder of InspectionAssignment-17, an occurrence of a direct maintenance-assignment species. A capability claim may say that Robot-7 can inspect turbines, and source prose may say it “possesses inspection algorithm A”. Neither claim is dated performance, and neither makes TurbineInspectionProcedure-v3 a U.MethodDescription. If InspectionWork-17 occurs, first recover Robot-7’s full A.13 core through that same obtaining assignment and let A.15.1 independently admit the Work. Then, because this alignment also expressly consumes precise assignment-bound attribution, establish F.6 through InspectionAssignment-17. The already recovered performer performed the Work under that assignment, and the Work enacted TurbineInspection@Maintenance-2026. Use A.3.2 to decide whether the procedure episteme is a MethodDescription. Robot-7 acts; the kind, assignment, capability, algorithm wording, Method, and description do not.

Key takeaway. Both cases use an admitted holder System, a local system-role kind, an assignment occurrence and its declared species, a Method, a separate MethodDescription, a capability relied on for the case, and dated Work. Their taxonomies, schemes, commissions, records, and results remain separate values and relations. This common alignment does not erase their different domain ontologies.

A.15:5.1.a - Briefing guides orientation, not execution

Source set. A release team has one deployment method description, one current work plan, one approval or decision record when required, and the evidence records and evidence relations used to decide whether the rollout may proceed. A short rollout briefing is prepared for the daily stand-up.

Briefing slice. Status briefing only: rollback procedure appears verified in the current source bundle. Execution remains tied to the deployment method, work plan, required approval or decision record, and evidence relation.

This briefing may orient the team and cue attention. If the team wants to execute from the briefing alone, use A.15.4 or the evidence, gate, decision, or assurance pattern that defines or tests the claim to recover the missing project-side kind and reference. Inside A.15, keep only the system-role kind, assignment, Method, plan, and Work-occurrence separation.

A.15:5.1.b - P2W principle-scheme publication guides planning, not occurrence

Source set. A team has a principle scheme that shows an E.18.1 P2W carry-through structure for a fabrication task: signature or principle episteme, method-family selection, selected method, U.WorkPlan, an actual Work occurrence admitted under U.Work, a separate work-result record, and result measurement.

Published slice. For this batch family, method M-2 is selected from the declared method family; prepare work plan WP-17 before any actual Work occurrence exists.

This publication may guide method inspection and work-planning preparation under A.15. A conforming use keeps selected method, U.WorkPlan, actual dated Work occurrence, separate assertion or record about it, work-result record, and result measurement distinct. If the publication is used for evidence, provenance, engineering justification, gate or constraint decision, physical medium, screen, export, OCR behavior, or publication-use, use the pattern that defines or tests that claim. If no project-side kind and reference named by value exists, create only an A.15.4 repair request, decision-request record for the next decision, prospective work-plan entry, or explicit missing-source-relation note.

A.15:5.1.c - Scenario guides method selection, not performed work

Source set. A method-selection scenario says that material X is below threshold T, resource window W is available, and the fabrication cell is under setup condition S. The scenario is admitted source material; a publication form or carrier may expose that source material for choosing between method families but does not become the selected method or plan.

Published slice. Under scenario S, method family MF-2 is admissible for planning; choose the selected method and prepare the work plan before execution.

The scenario can guide method-family selection and work-planning preparation. Once the team selects a method or prepares a plan, state that project choice or plan in a separate episteme. If an actual Work occurrence is later claimed, ground that world-side individual independently under A.15.1; a separate assertion or performed-work record may designate it but does not become the occurrence. If the scenario is used for evidence, gate, or engineering-justification reliance, first recover the project evidence relation, gate or constraint decision, or engineering-justification record named by value under A.10, A.20, A.21, or B.3; otherwise record only an A.15.4 repair request, decision-request record, prospective work-plan entry, or missing-source-relation note.