fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 14107–14116

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 17:24:51 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 17:30:20 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 18:05:19 UTC

A.6.0:4.8 - Add explicit objects only for a named receiving use

Make three decisions by naming the next sentence, comparison, tool, or declaration that must work:

  1. State the direct relation and stop. Use this branch when the task only asks whether one direct relation’s predicate holds for its actual participants under its subject pattern’s conditions. State the affirmative or negative claim under that pattern, or an exact governed modal claim when that family is current. For example, During Shift-17, Robot-7 is assigned as inspector through InspectionAssignment-17 is a complete current A.2.1 assertion when the direct MaintenanceInspectionAssignment predicate holds. Add an A.10 or receiving-evaluation reliance judgment only when the task separately asks whether to rely on the assertion.
  2. Share one declaration. Reuse or author a signature when at least two named claims or consumers must use the same participant meanings, vocabulary, laws, or applicability. For example, a staffing assertion and an F.6 Work-attribution consumer can cite the MaintenanceInspectionAssignment RelationSignature when both must interpret HolderSystemSlot, its declaration-local AssignedSystemRoleKindSlot with MaintenanceSystemRoleKindDomain as ValueKind and ByValue as refMode, any real species-specific participants, and the same direct predicate. In InspectionAssignment-17, InspectorSystemRole is the assigned-kind participant value. One sentence that merely repeats the word assigned does not open this branch. When a declaration is authored, C.2.1 identifies the episteme from its own claim content, exact EntityOfConcern, and effective reference scheme; A.6.0 then judges U.Signature membership.
  3. Distinguish one occurrence. Open occurrence identity only when a later claim must refer to that same occurrence, compare or qualify it, track its beginning, continuation, cessation, or change, or use it as a participant of another relation. For example, F.6 work attribution must cite the exact covering assignment episode, and a staffing history that compares Shift-17 with a later reassignment must apply A.2.1’s uninterrupted-obtaining same-versus-new-occurrence rule. A roster-row identifier that merely designates an assertion identifies neither the assignment occurrence nor a new occurrence; use F.18 only after A.2.1 has distinguished the occurrence to which a reference should resolve.

These are the receiving-use thresholds. They concern three different objects and are not stages that construct a relation or episteme from need. The stop is observable: the target direct assertion, shared declaration for the named consumers, or occurrence-referencing claim can be written without another unresolved object. That target motivates authoring, selection, reuse, or explicit individuation. Apply C.2.1 to episteme identity and the direct relation pattern to occurrence identity. Selecting or reusing an unchanged episteme leaves its identity unchanged. When entries, branches, returns, or stops form one reusable structure, apply A.22.CGUS only after the A.22 identity, local locus bindings, selected relations and constraints, and potential continuations are recoverable.