A.6.RCD:5.4 - Formal and probabilistic result use: preserve separate algebras

Situation. One engineering decision-work occurrence consumes one formal result episteme and one probabilistic result episteme.

Base and derivation. Keep the formal result in its formal substrate and the probabilistic result in its probability substrate. State the two result-use assertions under their exact predicates in one C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is the engineering decision-work occurrence. The formal and probabilistic result epistemes remain distinct used results; neither their pair nor a union of nearby objects replaces that concern.

No F.9 Bridge is needed for this case as stated: the two result epistemes enter the decision through separate direct use relations, and no obtaining relation between two exact F.17 cells is claimed. No ReferencePlane crossing is claimed either, so no plane relation or policy is added. Either fact could later become current without creating the other.

Positive case. Both direct use relations obtain for the decision-work occurrence under their own applicability, so the decision rationale can cite each result for its admitted use.

Discriminating failure. The two results are co-published or mention the same subject, but the decision work has no current direct use relation to one of them. Shared carrier, topic, or notation does not establish decision use.

Disposition and stop. The apparent combined need decomposes into two independently stated receiving claims. Each closes under disposition 1 with its exact direct decision-use relation. Do not publish a cross-algebra conjunction predicate merely to join the sentences, and do not infer one composite relation occurrence from a decision record.