| Filled-card ontology | A completed record is treated as what makes an episteme or relation exist. | Recover the C.2.1 identity first. Identify a filled card as an episteme only when its claim content, EntityOfConcern, and effective reference scheme are recoverable; identify its reusable layout, exact carrier, and publication occurrence separately under their direct patterns. |
| Manifest-created declaration | A manifest row, list, citation, identifier, or edition marker is treated as creating declaration identity, U.Signature membership, or a dependency. | Identify the declaration episteme through the C.2.1 triple, judge same-individual U.Signature membership under A.6.0, and expose a manifest only for actual dependencies or provided names. A readable one-off assertion stops without either. |
| Classification as admission relation | A candidate is said to acquire or lose holonhood when a governing FPF pattern or assertion changes. | Apply the A.1 constructive criterion for an admitted holon kind; let E.24.UK govern only admission of that public kind; identify a separate C.2.1 assertion episteme when project review needs the classification claim. |
| Dependent kind as second identity | U.MethodDescription, U.View, or another dependent episteme kind is given an extra identity discriminator merely because its direct pattern supplies a membership condition. | Keep the C.2.1 identity of the same episteme individual. Apply the direct pattern only to judge dependent-kind membership; if work changes a C.2.1 discriminator, identify the resulting episteme through that changed discriminator. |
| Context identifier in episteme identity by habit | A surrounding project or model-use context identifier is treated as identifying every episteme used there. | Keep the shared C.2.1 identity context-independent; add claim scope, viewpoint, or bounded model-use structure only through the direct relation on which the current use depends. |
| Grounding by evidence presence | Stored evidence or one unrelated measurement is treated as grounding the whole episteme. | Select the exact covered claim subgraph, map every empirical claim in it to its required observation, intervention, measurement, or test relations involving the grounding holon, and test continuity of that complete coverage predicate. Evaluation or evidence supports the grounding assertion unless an exact evaluation relation is explicitly part of the empirical test; availability alone determines no world-side grounding state. |
| Edition work as relation participant | Revision Work is inserted into EpistemeEditionRelation, so two Work occurrences appear to create two continuities between the same editions. | Keep earlier and later epistemes as the two participants. Use Work, Method, source use, provenance, and change facts only as case facts for the independently stated continuity rule. |
| Edition by filename or Method label | v2, a later timestamp, or a Method named revision is taken as continuity. | Recover both episteme identities, exact source use, the applicable continuity rule, its preserved and deliberately changed features, and its fork, translation, retargeting, and reconstruction failures. |
| Published-episteme kind | Temporary participation in publication is treated as a second durable episteme kind. | Keep the episteme identity and state the exact publication occurrence; use Plain published episteme only for that contingent use. |
| View as formatting, generation, or publication | A filtered table, diagram, query result, or published face is called a view because of appearance, construction history, or carrier, and a heading or edge is treated as cross-view correspondence. | Identify the receiving episteme under C.2.1 and apply E.17.0 conformance for U.View membership. Add A.6.3 only for an actual source-to-receiving construction. Apply the exact direct subject-relation governor to correspondence; if none is recoverable, return an exact blocker naming the participants, required predicate and use, and missing governor. |
| Bridge as use verdict | An obtaining Bridge, its predicate profile, or a card is treated as proving that one comparison, translation, publication, or other use is suitable, authorized, or already performed. | Keep the Bridge under F.9. State the proposed use in a separate ordinary C.2.1 assertion with the Bridge as EntityOfConcern and <u,d,r,t> plus polarity; use A.10 for ordinary evidence reliance, B.3 only for an actual named assurance claim, and the direct pattern for any receiving object that actually exists. |
| Mathematical identity leak | A tuple key or graph node identity becomes episteme identity. | Keep representation identity separate and use the C.2.1 identity triple. |