C.20:4.9 - Crossing, comparison, evidence, health, and publication are conditional branches

Open these branches only when the named discipline use actually needs them.

Cross-field or cross-sense use. A cross-field use may use independently governed claims without a semantic crossing. When an exact cross-context semantic relation is claimed, first resolve two exact F.17 SchemeSenseCell values; F.9 identifies an obtaining Bridge only when their semantic-context projections differ and the direct predicate and dependencies are satisfied. A field, scheme, cell, or plane difference alone creates no Bridge. For an obtaining Bridge, keep a separate current C.2.1 bounded-use proposition whose EntityOfConcern is that Bridge and whose ClaimGraph names the proposed action u, exact direction d, use-specific correspondence rule r, tolerated semantic loss t, and affirmative or negative polarity. Observed loss and counterexamples remain evidence; the permitted-loss tolerance remains claim content. Neither one reidentifies the Bridge.

For ordinary evidence reliance, use the exact A.10 evidence-provenance relation for the same bounded use. Only RelianceDisposition=pass supports that affirmative use; degrade supports only the named narrower use, while abstain, reopen, evidence-needed, assurance-needed, or blocked-current-use does not pass the attempt. Use B.3 only when an actual named assurance claim is current, and require its result for that same bounded assurance use. Authorization and any actual comparison, substitution, translation, publication, or Work occurrence remain with their subject patterns.

Crossing visibility and presentation checks. Keep an exact Bridge and separate bounded-use proposition discoverable in an account that relies on that obtaining semantic relation. For a ReferencePlane-only crossing, keep the applicable plane relation and policy discoverable instead; if both facts are current, keep both under their own predicates. Materialize an E.18 CrossingBundle only when an independently current E.18 structural GateCrossing exists and a named downstream use relies on durable evidence for that structural crossing; if it also relies on cross-semantic correspondence, add E.18’s separate F.9 block. E.17 governs publication packaging and A.21 governs any actual GateCheck or GateDecision. For lane purity, inspect the current B.3 result by value: every characteristic keeps its bearer and scale, and any aggregation cites its domain model and assumptions; there is no universal F-G-R-CL fold. Apply E.10 lexical checks to the published labels, keep normative prose notation-neutral, and treat every discipline column as didactic only.

Comparison or aggregation. A.17 identifies every exact Characteristic; A.18 supplies its Scale, Unit and legal operations; C.16 supplies a measurement result only when an actual measurement chain exists. A mean over an ordinal Scale and an aggregation that mixes unconverted or incommensurable Units are inadmissible: stop that operation, establish a lawful transformation or comparison scheme, or retain the separate values rather than manufacturing an aggregate. One actual A.19.CPM comparison application binds the profile pair, comparator, claim scope and selected slices, optional predicate, reference scheme and plane, evaluation point or interval, dated comparison Work, operation application, set-valued result, and evidence policy; CPM does not fold or aggregate. Any numeric or profile aggregation is a separate explicit A.19.ULSAM or applicable B.1 Γ-fold operation with its own dated Work and result binding. Before either operation, the applicable G.0 CG-Spec route names the exact Characteristic ids, ScaleComplianceProfile with Scale, Unit, polarity and legal-operation conditions, MinimalEvidence, and either the admitted ComparatorSet member for comparison or the declared Γ-fold and contributors for aggregation. This pre-operation admissibility check fails closed on missing or unknown declarations or evidence and creates neither equality, an aggregate, nor a winner. An operation that relies on an obtaining F.9 Bridge between two exact F.17 SchemeSenseCell values uses the separate Bridge, bounded-use-claim, and reliance branch above; a crossing of exact ReferencePlanes instead cites the applicable plane relation and policy. If both facts are current, state both under their own predicates. A scheme, cell, or plane difference alone creates neither relation. Neither branch supplies the comparison or aggregation scope, predicate, comparator, plane, time, result, or selection.

Evidence, currentness, and assurance. Use A.10 for source use and the evidence-provenance path, and G.11 for selected-edition currentness. When an imported source claim supports a construction, classification, comparison, publication, or assurance use, keep the exact source and edition plus only the lane tags, freshness window, or validity conditions that the receiving use consumes. Claims that need no such reliance acquire none of this apparatus merely because they concern a discipline. Open B.3 only for an actual named assurance claim. Its AssuranceResult identifies the target claim, assurance use, basis, disposition, limits, and reopen condition. If the argument consumes a characteristic or calculation, name its bearer, property, scale, unit, interpretation, basis, dependency model, assumptions, rule, and rival as applicable. C.20 supplies no default F/G/R/CL lanes, weakest-link fold, SpanUnion, congruence penalty, plane penalty, or assurance arithmetic. A Bridge-related penalty is current only when an actual named B.3 assurance claim uses an applicable declared domain model whose current facts and rule yield it; that value belongs only to the calculated AssuranceResult for that named use. State ReferencePlane only when it changes an exact input or interpretation; when an exact plane crossing is current, cite the applicable plane relation and policy. The selected plane and its relation identify neither a discipline part nor a part relation. Insufficient or unknown support narrows, abstains, requests evidence, reopens, or blocks the attempted assurance use under B.3; it does not make a part relation or whole obtain or cease.

Health or state view. C.21 can evaluate typed discipline-health characteristics. Local values such as emerging, consolidating, codified, or fragmenting require their own criteria, Scale, evidence basis, qualification window, and currentness. Any decision threshold belongs to the relevant G.4 AcceptanceClause. A state label, health vector, score, or dashboard transition is descriptive and does not itself reidentify the discipline.

Description and publication. The claim-bearing whole expressed by a discipline description, construction trace, comparison report, health series, card, or registry row is identified as an episteme under C.2.1 when that pattern’s constitution test holds. E.24.PUB governs any actual publication occurrence and keeps selected episteme edition, audience, bounded-use declaration, form, carrier, and availability interval distinct. Updating or publishing the account changes neither the field assembly nor its past.