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 10:17:34 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 10:20:08 UTC

A.2.5:4.4 - Assertion and Evidence Use

For a relied-on state claim, keep this order:

  1. name the exact U.SystemRoleAssignment, by-value SystemRoleAssignmentStatePredicate, direct claim family, and affirmative or negative assertion polarity;
  2. when A.2.5 independently establishes obtaining and the receiving use needs occurrence identity, individuate the occurrence under section 4.3;
  3. state a SystemRoleAssignmentStateAssertion : U.Episteme whose ClaimGraph carries the predicate, direct claim-family reference, polarity, known systemRoleAssignmentStateExtent only for an affirmative claim about an established occurrence, and any separate declaredSystemRoleAssignmentStateEvaluationWindow;
  4. include a meaning-bearing semantic-basis reference in the predicate identity, while a non-meaning-changing receiving-use selection stays with that use;
  5. use A.2.4 for compact evidence use and A.10 only when fuller evidence-basis detail changes the relied-on use; and
  6. let the direct consumer apply the supported assertion under its own subject pattern.

When evaluation itself is current, recover the exact actual evaluator System through A.13 and let A.15.1 independently admit exact dated evaluation W_eval : U.Work. Add F.6 performedUnderAssignment(W_eval, RA_eval) through the same obtaining A.13 assignment only when this account or its receiving use expressly consumes precise assignment-bound attribution; F.6 identifies neither assignment nor performer, and missing or failed F.6 leaves the evaluation Work intact. A separately constituted evaluation result is a C.2.1 episteme whose ClaimGraph states the judgment about the assignment or established occurrence. The evaluation and receiving use add no participants to the state relation: its participants remain the tested assignment and its predicate, and occurrence identity still follows §4.3.

The actual state extent, target evaluation window, and evidence-relevance interval answer different questions. Expired evidence lowers reliance without retroactively rewriting an earlier world-side occurrence.