A.6.4:5 - Archetypal Grounding (Tell-Show-Show)

Tell. Retargeting means “different EntityOfConcern, one stated invariant, visible loss, one named use, and exact current facts for judging it”.

Show 1 — Physical cabinet to selected functional structure. X concerns cabinet Cab-7; Y concerns selected functional U.Structure Route-A. C.2.1 identifies the cabinet and structure independently. Affirmative q states that the routing-behaviour invariant makes the visible loss acceptable for fault-isolation planning. A current behaviour-test result compares Cab-7’s observed routing under q’s named conditions with the routing decisions stated for Route-A and meets q’s criterion; the judgement is satisfies. The source expression Realises(Cab-7, Route-A) names an intended relation and its participants but has no current direct predicate or governor, so it stops at missing-governor and contributes nothing to that judgement. Y drops cabinet layout and manufacturer details. E.18 placement identifies neither r nor q and supplies no judgement.

Show 2 — Fourier near-miss and positive branch. In the ordinary case, X and Y both concern sampled signal run Signal-17; X uses a time-domain representation and Y a frequency-domain representation. Route first through C.29 and then A.6.3.RT. Under its declared conditions, Parseval’s relation gives the energy-preservation equality; the spectrum notation still represents the same EntityOfConcern.

A positive A.6.4 branch opens only if C.2.1 separately identifies, for example, exact signal run Signal-17 and exact spectral-distribution object Spectrum-17 as the two EntitiesOfConcern. The receiving use must actually concern Spectrum-17—for example, comparing its peak distribution with another spectrum—rather than merely read another representation of Signal-17. Then r relates the two epistemes; affirmative q states the spectral-comparison proposition and may cite the Fourier relation and Parseval test. The current-case judgement is satisfies only when the named facts meet q’s conditions and criterion while lost time localization remains visible.

Show 3 — Dataset to model. X concerns dataset D; Y concerns fitted model M, independently identified under the applicable model pattern. Affirmative q states the predictive invariant, visible losses, named prediction use, and conditions. The exact fit result and held-out test outcome are current-case facts; the judgement is satisfies when those facts meet q’s conditions and invariant criterion. Individual observations and unmodelled distinctions remain visible losses, and any other dataset claim needs its own transfer basis. The fitting application and Work remain separate from r, q, and the judgement.