C.2.8:4.3 - Correct recovery and the expression’s contribution

Correct recovery preserves the selected relation’s participants, predicate, polarity, modality and action-changing conditions under the declared source or criterion. State the unit of structure only as precisely as the comparison needs. A qualitative result can name additional and missing dependencies directly; a count must also define its granularity.

Repeated expression of the same relation does not add structural amount merely by increasing words, boxes or arrows. A count of edges in a representation needs a correspondence to the selected semantic relations before it can count those relations.

Keep two questions distinct when the source contains a false or unsupported claim. A reader may correctly recover that the account asserts that claim. Establishing the claim about the described world requires its subject and evidence criteria. For recovery of warranted source structure, an unsupported relation does not count as a correct member. Recovering the assertion and endorsing its content are different results.

Prior knowledge may supply vocabulary, notation and inference used to decode the expression. A reader who independently corrects false text from memory has supplied a correction; the text does not receive credit for that corrected relation. When attribution matters, preserve the initial response and identify actual assistance and source returns before interpreting the observed difference. An explanation can expose already familiar structure: ESI is not restricted to newly learned information.