A.6.3.RT:7 - Conformance and counterexample replay

A.6.3.RT:7.1 - Ordinary and exact checks

CC-RT-1 — Useful ordinary entry. A user can recover the source content, choose an available scheme, make a target suited to the next action, and compare it with the source before supplying exact endpoint identities. Givens, unknowns and a partial construction can support this first result.
CC-RT-2 — Same concern and right family. The target still concerns the same thing; representation scheme or reasoning medium is the primary change rather than wording, narrative, explanation, carrier work, retargeting, bridge use, or controlled coarsening.
CC-RT-3 — Delta and source comparison. Preserved and foregrounded content, rearrangement, loss, recoverability, and apparent links not licensed by the source are visible.
CC-RT-4 — Use and return. Admissible and non-admissible use plus a practical source-return trigger are clear.
CC-RT-5 — Progressive burden. Detailed factors, semiotic mode, decode evidence, exact identities, Work, publication, evidence, and assurance appear only when each changes use or blocks a likely error.
CC-RT-6 — Exact endpoints when triggered. X and Y are independently constituted C.2.1 epistemes with the same exact EntityOfConcern and recoverable effective schemes; forms, carriers, models, displays, and readable output substitute for neither.
CC-RT-7 — Exact construction. v : X -> Y states claim construction, endpoint-scheme relation, same exact EntityOfConcern, preservation, loss/recovery, prohibited strengthening, applicability, use, and return.
CC-RT-8 — Exact dependencies and neighbors. Correspondence dependencies obtain independently; C.29 representation, E.17.0 View membership, grounding, publication, evidence, assurance, bridge, gate, and receiving Work remain separate.
CC-RT-9 — Later-specific occurrence only at its trigger. A positive RepresentationSchemeTransitionRelation@Context has the exact A.1.1 model-use structure, preserved concern, X, Y, two exact scheme-description epistemes, and actual Work satisfying §4.1.b.
CC-RT-10 — Occurrence, Work, and description stay distinct. The participant tuple identifies the occurrence; Work and production claims remain separate; the transition-description episteme has the occurrence as EntityOfConcern and its own C.2.1 identity.
CC-RT-11 — Occurrence identity. Only a changed participant reidentifies the occurrence; repeat Work, evidence, publication, layout, carrier, description edition, or C.29 output does not.
CC-RT-12 — Reuse is local. When the source or target, delta, dependency, loss, use, evidence, or return changes, reopen only the affected part of the account.
CC-RT-13 — Construction and subject result. The expression uses identified rules and supports the named operation. A trial is required only when it can decide usefulness. A new subject conclusion keeps its construction or argument as its source; notation-scheme design and the subject Method remain distinct from making the expression.

A.6.3.RT:7.2 - Counterexample replay

Case	Required result
Ordinary entry	A service note can become a useful comparison table and loss note without first inventing `X`, `Y`, `v`, Work, publication, or assurance records.
Constructive use	Givens and an intermediate geometric construction can become a diagram used in an argument. RT compares the diagram with those inputs; geometry establishes any new conclusion.
Scheme limit	If the selected conventions cannot express a required distinction, choose another scheme or design the missing rules before claiming a usable expression under them.
Preserve vs retarget	Exact RT requires equal EntityOfConcern; a changed concern requires A.6.4 even when labels overlap.
Same scheme	If scheme and reasoning medium are unchanged and only wording changes, use A.6.3.CR.
Different scheme	Scheme difference alone establishes neither `v`, correspondence, Work, Bridge, nor the six-participant occurrence.
Candidate vs `U.View`	A valid receiving episteme and RT construction may fail E.17.0 conformance and remain a non-View candidate.
Publication/form/carrier	Availability, form change, or carrier replacement substitutes for no endpoint and reidentifies no unchanged construction or occurrence.
Work without conservativity	A system may produce `Y`, yet unsupported strengthening or hidden loss blocks the exact construction and occurrence.
Grounded source, ungrounded receiver	Grounding of `X` does not transfer through `v`; `Y` has an `EpistemeEmpiricalGroundingRelation` only when its own covered claims and conditions make one obtain.
Readable decode without recovery basis	Keep a fluent decoded output exploratory, report-only, or blocked until the same-concern source, a declared decoding or access relation, recoverability evidence for the intended use, admissible and non-admissible use, remaining user action, and return are present. Readability, probe score, feature geometry, or publication form fills no episteme endpoint.
Selected structure overread	The exact `BoundedModelUseStructure` is one participant only in the triggered occurrence; it is not transformer, viewpoint, `U.View`, representation, publication, or EntityOfConcern.
Cross-scheme dependency	Scheme difference, similar content, a description, or C.29 output cannot replace an exact transition. When the dependency crosses semantic contexts, none of those cues can replace the obtaining F.9 Bridge and separate bounded-use claim.
Description or C.29 output	Editing the transition description or mathematical output does not change the occurrence unless an exact participant changes.