C.19.1:7.1 - C.32 architecture-synthesis use relation

When using C.32 to generate candidate architectures, C.19.1 applies only if a claim about a candidate asserts scale advantage or invokes a declared local generality policy. For a universal module relation, platform, organization design, evidence arrangement, or selected structure, that branch is a project analogy or policy: the empirical machine-learning literature is not proof. Name the exact bearer and its direct pattern, the holon under change when one is current, the bearer-specific scale predicate, objective vector, comparison basis, feasible evidence, admissibility boundary, and intended receiving use.

BLP neither selects the architecture nor turns method-family, practice, role-side, or culture wording into a holon kind. If the candidate merely removes parts, carries several functions, or is described as reusable, with no recoverable scale claim or declared generality-policy claim, keep the question in C.32 and C.31; return no scale claim yet rather than manufacturing an audit. A TRIZ-style ideality move enters BLP only when the declared comparison actually relies on scale amenability inside a named window.