A.6.2:4.3.1 - P0 — Typed episteme, endpoint-value, and relation-read profile (C.2.1-grounded)

For any arrow f : X→Y presented as an effect-free episteme morphism:

1. Typed epistemes. X and Y are epistemes of declared kinds K_X, K_Y : U.EpistemeKind, each identified under C.2.1 by exact claim content, one EntityOfConcern, and one effective ReferenceScheme. Grounding and representation relations are added only when current; a viewpoint selected for a named describing use remains outside episteme identity.

2. Value and use projection. For each episteme E—and separately for a named describing use when one is current—EFEM laws may refer to:

   • content(E) : U.ClaimGraph — E’s exact identity-bearing claim content;
   • entityOfConcernRef(E) : U.EntityRef — designates E’s exact EntityOfConcern;
   • selectedViewpointRef?(use) : U.ViewpointRef — only when the named describing use selects one exact viewpoint; this is not a component of E’s identity;
   • referenceScheme?(E) : U.ReferenceScheme — E’s effective designation and interpretation scheme;
   • representationSchemeRef?(E) : U.RepresentationSchemeRef — only when an exact representation scheme and its correspondence relation are current for E under their direct governors; C.29 governs any mathematical-lens use; this is not a C.2.1 identity component;
   • a separately current neighboring fact — name the exact EpistemeEditionRelation, exact A.10 evidence or provenance relation, or other governed predicate and its participants when the arrow family reads or compares it; do not collect these facts in a generic projection. If E asserts such a fact, that assertion is already part of content(E).

   When grounding matters, name the exact grounding relation, its grounding holon, and the claims it covers; grounding is not another component of episteme identity.

3. Derived EntityOfConcernChangeMode and subtype restriction. Each admitted arrow receives its mode from its resolved endpoint EntitiesOfConcern:

   • entityOfConcernChangeMode(f) = preserve when X and Y concern the same exact entity; a current grounding relation remains a separately governed fact;
   • entityOfConcernChangeMode(f) = retarget when X and Y concern independently different entities. Any claim that f supports one receiving use is a separate A.6.4 bounded-use assertion q; its ClaimGraph states the invariant, visible loss, receiving use, conditions, and affirmative or negative polarity. A current-case judgement separately tests the exact facts.

   The parent EFEM class contains both modes. A named species or subtype may admit only one mode, but that restriction does not by itself make the subtype closed under composition. Classify each composite again from its final endpoints under P3.

4. Legacy SubjectRef and describing-use discipline. For Description epistemes, including those admitted for specification use, resolve legacy subjectRef(E) to exact E and its EntityOfConcern. State which endpoint claim content, EntityOfConcern, and effective scheme are preserved or differ. When grounding or a selected describing-use viewpoint matters, name the exact occurrence or use qualification on each side and state which facts the rule reads or compares. Any occurrence change follows its direct relation pattern, while viewpoint selection and conformance remain separately claimed.