A.6.3.CR:4.5.c. - Authority and changed-claim boundary

A case reviewed under this pattern stays about the same entity and remains an episteme-to-episteme textual rewrite. It does not establish explanation faithfulness, an F.9 Bridge or bounded-use suitability, retargeting, current reliance, authorization, or actual receiving use. If the rewrite becomes explanatory, Bridge-bearing, gate-bearing, or world-facing, state the attempted claim and use the pattern that defines, constrains, or tests it. Use F.9 for a semantic Bridge between two exact F.17 local senses or a proposed bounded use of that Bridge. Take a current reliance question to triggered A.10 or B.3 and authorization to the pattern that directly constrains the receiving act. For an asserted occurrence, first recover the actual object or occurrence under its direct obtaining or admission rule, then cite the evidence on which the assertion relies. A precise dated Work claim needs A.13 and independent A.15.1 admission; add F.6 only for precise assignment-bound attribution. Do not create those records when their branches are not live.