B.2.4:4.2 - Subject-Pattern Test
Before applying B.2, test whether the exact facts are already explained under a subject pattern:
| Exact fact or claim under concern | Subject pattern if sufficient | B.2.4 remains current only when |
|---|---|---|
| Capability envelope | A.2.2 for the capability of an exact System holder, C.16 for measured characteristics; A.10 only for evidence use | the exact envelope and holder facts leave a candidate-whole question that the existing whole cannot explain |
| Function or functioning relation | A.6.F recovers the exact claim and its direct subject pattern; A.3.4 for an actual transformation and C.16 for a measured characteristic | the obtaining relation and whole-level facts leave a residual new-whole question |
| Transformation-flow structure | E.18 for the selected structure, A.3.4 for actual transformations, C.30.TFS-REL for bounded architecture use; C.29 only for a mathematical representation use | the selected in-life structure changes which whole can carry the current claim |
| Method relation or method family | A.3.1 for Method identity, B.1.5 for composition, A.15 for role–Method–Work alignment, and G.5 for registry or selector-facing use; use the direct pattern for any separately claimed family relation and C.29 only when a lens is used | the exact method facts change the whole, not merely the way of doing |
| Method description or procedure text | A.3.2 and C.2.1 distinguish the MethodDescription and its episteme identity; use E.17 or E.24.PUB for a current publication occurrence, form, or carrier, C.2.P for unresolved source-expression or source-to-use wording, and A.10 or G.6 only when evidence provenance is relied on | an in-life whole-reidentification question remains after the description is separated |
| Work plan or work occurrence | A.15.2, A.15.1 | exact planned or performed work facts leave a new-whole question; the plan or occurrence is not the whole by label |
| Module, component, or bearer allocation | The direct allocation or parthood pattern; A.6.M for unresolved module/interface wording; C.30, A.22 or C.30.ASV only for the corresponding claim | exact allocation and architecture facts defeat the existing-whole explanation |
| Metric, score, threshold, robustness, or quality claim | C.16, A.19; A.10 only for evidence use | the underlying characteristic facts, not the score or support record alone, defeat that explanation |