A.6.1:4.6 - State realization as a direct relation
Use the readable direct form first:
Entity E realizes U.Mechanism M for ClaimScope S during interval T.
The relation has these positions when typed reuse needs them:
| Relation position | Value kind | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| declared mechanism | U.Mechanism | The declaration whose operations and laws are current. |
| realizing entity | U.Entity or a narrower direct kind | The entity claimed to realize the declaration; its direct kind remains unchanged. |
| realization scope | U.ClaimScope | The exact entities and relations for which the realization claim is made. |
| derived realization extent | temporal interval | The maximal continuous interval over which the realization predicate obtains; this is an identity contribution, not a writable participant. |
The realization predicate obtains when the realizing entity provides the declared operations and preserves the declared laws for admitted uses in the stated scope and interval. A refined mechanism declaration may narrow Applicability or strengthen laws or admission conditions only with the preserved and changed semantic content stated explicitly. The realizing entity realizes the exact mechanism episteme named in the relation. Any refinement or edition relation is a separate claim under its direct predicate. If a claimed realization relaxes a declared law, bypasses an admission condition, or relies on undeclared operation meanings, return to the exact realization predicate. State that the relation does not obtain when that predicate is known false; leave the exact claim unresolved when required meanings or case facts are unavailable.
The non-derived participants are the declared mechanism, realizing entity, and realization scope. When a later use needs one occurrence distinguished from another, its direct identity is <declaredMechanism, realizingEntity, realizationScope, maximalContinuousRealizationInterval>. The interval is derived as the maximal continuous interval over which the realization predicate obtains. A new evaluation window or a gap in available evidence does not split the occurrence; demonstrated cessation followed by later realization does.
Ordinary use stops at the readable sentence. If another claim must refer to or compare one realization occurrence, the direct relation pattern and A.6.REL govern explicit occurrence identity. Evidence, evaluation, application, and binding occurrences remain supporting or use-side neighbors rather than realization participants.