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 08:25:59 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 08:26:43 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 10:05:06 UTC

A.19.CN:8.4 - Worked mini-schemas (entity and relation mixtures across CN-frames, informative)

The three small schemas below show an operations use, an assurance use, and an alignment use. They are explanatory representations, not storage requirements. Each keeps the bearer, system-role kind and assignment, measurement or evaluation result, source-local relation, and evidence use distinct.

A.19.CN:8.4.1 - Operations CN‑frame — runtime gating and enactment

Entity graph view:

System ── classifiedAs ──> SystemRoleKind
System + SystemRoleKind + scope/window ── assignment ──> SystemRoleAssignment
Role-state graph ── lists ──> State
Checklist ── tested by evaluation Work ──> StateAssertion
Work ── performedBy ──> assigned System
Work ── enacts ──> Method

The System is classified under one exact local system-role kind and participates in an obtaining assignment for the stated scope and window. A role-state graph lists states such as Ready, Waiting, or Degraded. Evaluation Work applies the state checklist and supports a StateAssertion. Operational Work may proceed only when the relied-on assertion says that an enactable state obtains; the Work, Method, assignment, and result remain different objects.

Relational stub:

TableKey columns (essential)
ROLE_ASSIGNMENTRA_ID; HOLDER_SYSTEM_ID; SYSTEM_ROLE_KIND_ID; REFERENCE_SCHEME_ID; SCOPE_REF?; WINDOW_FROM; WINDOW_TO
RCS_SNAPSHOTSNAP_ID; RA_ID; WINDOW_FROM; WINDOW_TO; CHAR_ID; VALUE; UNIT; SCALE_TYPE; RESULT_REF
RSG_STATESTATE_ID; SYSTEM_ROLE_KIND_ID; NAME; ENACTABLE
CHECKLISTCHK_ID; STATE_ID; PREDICATE_TYPE; PREDICATE_SPEC
STATE_ASSERTIONSA_ID; RA_ID; STATE_ID; CHK_ID; WINDOW_FROM; WINDOW_TO; VERDICT; NORMALIZATION_INSTANCE_ID?; BRIDGE_USE_CLAIM_REF?
WORKWORK_ID; PERFORMER_SYSTEM_ID; METHOD_ID; WINDOW_FROM; WINDOW_TO; result and evidence refs as needed

The RCS snapshot keeps the characteristic, value, unit, scale, window, and result identity visible. A StateAssertion separately identifies any normalization instance and any claim that uses a Bridge. An enactment query can therefore ask whether the latest admissible assertion for this assignment has an enactable state and a passing verdict without treating a role label, CN-frame, or Bridge as the acting System.

A.19.CN:8.4.2 - Assurance CN‑frame — evidence freshness and related local meanings

Entity graph view:

NormalizationMethodInstance ── used for ──> characteristic re-expression
F.9 Bridge ── relates ──> exact source and target F.17 cells
ComparisonClaim ── cites ──> normalization instance and/or Bridge-use claim
RelianceClaim ── cites ──> evidence status and assurance limits

The normalization instance identifies the declared re-expression and its validity window. The Bridge identifies only an obtaining relation between two exact local senses. A comparison that relies on either one says so in its own use claim; its evidence and assurance limits remain explicit.

Relational stub:

TableKey columns (essential)
NORMALIZATION_METHODNORMALIZATION_METHOD_ID; KIND; DESCRIPTION_REF
NORMALIZATION_INSTANCENORMALIZATION_INSTANCE_ID; NORMALIZATION_METHOD_ID; SRC_CHAR_ID; TGT_CHAR_ID; FORMULA_SPEC_OR_LUT_REF; VALIDITY_WINDOW; EVIDENCE_REF
BRIDGEBRIDGE_ID; SOURCE_CELL_REF; TARGET_CELL_REF; DIRECTION; CORRESPONDENCE_RULE; APPLICABLE_USE; TOLERATED_LOSS
COMPARISON_USEUSE_CLAIM_ID; RESULT_REF; NORMALIZATION_INSTANCE_ID?; BRIDGE_ID?; EVIDENCE_USE_REF; ASSURANCE_REF?
ASSURANCE_EVENTAE_ID; USE_CLAIM_ID; EFFECT; DETAILS; WINDOW

The tables make an audit path possible without assigning meaning to the table itself. A low-assurance relation, stale normalization instance, or refreshed evidence can be recorded as a distinct event and can reopen only the comparisons that rely on it.

A.19.CN:8.4.3 - Alignment CN‑frame — design-time reuse across local schemes

Entity graph view:

Checklist for target state ← re-expressed by N ─ Checklist for source state
source F.17 cell ── Bridge with direction and loss ──> target F.17 cell
SystemRoleKind' ── stated refinement relation ──> SystemRoleKind

A checklist from one source scheme may be re-expressed for another only through the named normalization instance and, when its local meaning changes, an obtaining F.9 Bridge plus a separate use claim. A stated refinement between system-role kinds records how their state distinctions correspond; it must preserve the entailment needed for enactability rather than relying on similar role names.

Relational stub:

TableKey columns (essential)
RSG_REFINEMENTREFINEMENT_ID; SOURCE_SYSTEM_ROLE_KIND_ID; TARGET_SYSTEM_ROLE_KIND_ID; SOURCE_STATE_ID; TARGET_STATE_ID; ENTAILMENT_RULE; EVIDENCE_REF
CHECKLIST_REEXPRESSIONREEXPRESSION_ID; SRC_STATE_ID; TGT_STATE_ID; NORMALIZATION_INSTANCE_ID; BRIDGE_USE_CLAIM_REF?; SOURCE_EDITION; TARGET_EDITION; VALIDITY_WINDOW

At least one enactable source state must correspond under the stated rule to an enactable target state when that is the promised refinement. The re-expression record fixes the two editions and validity window so later changes can reopen the affected alignment rather than silently changing an old checklist.