fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 18957–18975

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 05:29:54 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 05:30:57 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 07:15:14 UTC

A.6.RCD:4.5 - Settle a reusable predicate definition truthfully

When the same rule is used more than once, first ask where the reuse actually travels.

  • One exact subject. If every use asks about the same promise-content edition, subject structure, decision occurrence, or other exact subject, identify a subject-bounded compound-law episteme whose EntityOfConcern is that subject. State plainly that the rule may be reused only for claims about that subject; a familiar formula does not make it portable to another subject.
  • Across subject instances. If the same parameterized rule is applied to several independently identified subjects, identify one reusable predicate-definition episteme whose EntityOfConcern is the exact predicate definition itself. If its claim graph supplies the subject and value range, Vocabulary, Laws, and Applicability required by A.6.0, the already identified episteme may satisfy U.Signature membership without relation-kind admission. It remains a predicate-definition declaration, not a RelationSignature or a classifier of occurrences.

In either branch, the definition content states:

  • parameter and participant meanings;
  • the exact base-relation claims and the pattern content or declarations that define their predicates and obtaining laws;
  • the derivation rule under the selected substrate;
  • polarity, scope, time, and applicability;
  • base-definition and substrate dependencies plus their editions when current;
  • positive and discriminating cases;
  • the admissible claim use and the non-admissible occurrence or ontology overread.

If neither the exact subject nor the exact reusable predicate definition is the truthful EntityOfConcern, keep the needed results as local compound claims. Do not manufacture a union concern or alternate opportunistically between the rule and a nearby domain subject.