A.6.3.CSC:4.5 - Concrete loss, recoverability, and anti-overread
Name every concrete distinction omitted, weakened, aggregated, redacted, narrowed in scope, made harder to recover, or lost through representation change. Several losses can coexist and all decision-relevant ones remain visible. Redaction and aggregation describe how a loss arose; neither substitutes for the lost qualifier, uncertainty, alternative, evidence path, relation, scope, trace, or inspection possibility. No loss tag is required when the concrete account already changes every relevant decision. If a publication-facing case also needs an E.17 source-relation status, use the exact literal source-loss-declared; that literal says that loss was declared and does not say what was lost.
Recoverability and admissible use remain separate. After naming all losses, read the rows in order and take the first action whose condition holds for the proposed use. If several losses would suggest different actions, choose the action required by the most restrictive unresolved loss.
| Immediate next action | Use it only when |
|---|---|
| recover from the candidate | the candidate itself carries the information and method needed to recover the distinction now and is sufficient for the proposed use |
| return to the named source | the candidate is not sufficient, and the named source-bearing side can restore the distinction without new reconstruction, test, or validation |
| perform named reconstruction, test, or validation before use | neither the candidate nor the named source is sufficient, and a specific new recovery or validation action is available and must complete before the proposed use proceeds |
| block or drop the current use | neither the candidate nor the named source is sufficient, and no specific new recovery or validation action is currently available for this use; independent new evidence may later reopen and reclassify the case, but it does not change the immediate block |
The four rows are mutually exclusive descriptions of the next move, not a strength scale. A recoverable candidate is not automatically admissible for downstream use, and a blocked use is not repaired merely by saying the source might exist.
A coarsening chain may not reset provenance. For X -> Y1 -> Y2, identify all three epistemes and both constructions, carry forward every earlier loss and uncertainty, and state only the added loss at the second step. If that cannot be done, return to exact X.