fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 53391–53404

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 08:25:59 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 08:26:43 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 09:00:05 UTC

C.11:4.3.1 - Classical evidential baseline

Stay with the classical evidential baseline when the question is to compare already-available options through preferences, utilities or desirabilities, beliefs, and likely outcomes under uncertainty.

In this baseline, the options are being compared as evidence about what consequences are likely if they are chosen. This is the ordinary default when intervention structure, predictor-coupling, or context-sensitive non-commutativity are not yet doing real work in the case.

Typical practical cash-outs are:

  • choose now because the current shared BeliefState and OutcomeModel already make one option or tie-set survive, and no still-feasible probe is worth its cost;
  • probe again because one further observation, measurement, or comparison pass could still change the ranking without requiring a heavier causal, subjunctive, or context-order repair;
  • reroute because the current decision question is no longer really comparing one fixed OptionSet, but has become search, pool policy, selector-result declaration, publication-availability, or enactment work.

The baseline is still unfinished when the current comparison invokes it but cannot keep one shared BeliefState and OutcomeModel across the compared options, or when one heavier defect is already live and the current comparison still pretends one plain evidential comparison is enough.