C.2.8:1 - Problem frame

Use this pattern when an explanation, pattern text, architecture account or another expressed description must make selected structure recoverable by a particular reader or computational observer. You may be comparing two forms of the same account, deciding whether an added explanation exposes a missing dependency, or checking what an observer can extract with the available preparation and time.

First useful move. Name the relation or distinction the reader needs, identify the available account and its form, and state the preparation, source access and budget that can change recovery. Compare what the reader can correctly recover under those conditions. A useful result can be two sentences: “Both accounts expose the dependency on a durable write. Only the second account exposes why the reporting replica was chosen; this is an author estimate for readers familiar with replication, with the same source access and three-minute budget.”

The primary subject is extractable structural information: how much selected structure this reader or observer can correctly extract from this episteme through this form under the stated conditions. Here an episteme is the claim-bearing account; its form is how those claims are expressed. Prose, a diagram and a combined presentation may express the same claims differently.

What goes wrong if missed. Complete sentences or a shorter explanation can hide a needed condition. An expert may supply it from memory, so a correct answer can conceal what the account failed to explain. Comparing readers with different preparation or assistance can then make one text appear to expose more structure.

What this buys. One common structural question across forms and readers. The author can identify an additional recoverable dependency, preserve a sufficient explanation, or name the precise missing source or prerequisite.

Use an ordinary reading correction directly when the missing relation is already clear and no structural comparison is needed. Use the applicable task or learning evaluation when the live question is performance, burden, retention or transfer. This pattern supplies the structural-information characteristic those evaluations may consume; it does not select an explanation-design method or a universal quality score.