C.22.PFR:4.6 - Keep assertions, reliance, anticipated conditions, solvability, and cards separate

An assertion about the exact PFR obtaining predicate has affirmative or negative claim polarity. An affirmative assertion may designate an independently established occurrence; a negative assertion denies predicate satisfaction for the named participants and qualification but does not erase or reidentify an earlier occurrence. A.10 governs the evidence-use account for treating that assertion as supported, refuted, or unresolved in one receiving use; B.3 applies only when a named assurance claim is current. Assertion polarity, support, and reliance therefore answer different questions.

A possible or anticipated problem remains an exact forecast, scenario, counterfactual, or anticipated-condition claim in ProblemCard or another episteme until an actual-condition relation, an applicability relation, and adverse predicate truth all obtain. C.2.1 governs its assertion identity and polarity. Use C.27 when a rate, rhythm, recovery, or regime claim is being used to change action and C.28 when causal support is at issue. The exact direct claim pattern defines or constrains assumptions, horizon, and non-actual semantics. None of those claim-side facts establishes a current PFR.

A ProblemCard is one C.2.1 episteme with one exact ClaimGraph, one independently identified EntityOfConcern, and one effective U.ReferenceScheme. It may carry claims designating several PFR occurrences only when those claims are jointly about that one EntityOfConcern under the direct pattern that identifies it. When two PFR references lack such a joint concern, split the ClaimGraph and card. Conversely, several cards may designate the same PFR through different ClaimGraphs, schemes, viewpoints, or receiving uses. Card count, merge or split, currentness, assessment window, publication, carrier, and edition change neither PFR actuality nor identity. C.22.2:20.1b replays all three branches with exact objects: two Robot-7 PFR episodes share one A.1-identified Robot-7 and one card; Robot-7 and Robot-8 PFRs have no direct joint EntityOfConcern and force two ClaimGraphs and cards; and two differently qualified cards retain the unchanged PFR-InspectionAssignment-17 reference.

A claim that no supported method is currently available concerns the admitted method set, evidence, constraints, and intended use. Selecting or discovering a method changes current solvability; it does not end PFR while the actual condition remains adverse. Performed repair work can end PFR only when an independently recovered actual change makes a participant cease or moves the selected condition point to the non-adverse side.

Repeated problematization, method search, work, evaluation, and continuation occur in work and transformation flows governed by E.18.1 and E.23. A claim or plan may carry a reference to the same PFR while work and transformation occurrences participate in a selected transformation-flow structure. Neither that reference use nor any flow-structure relation enters PFR identity. A later PFR is a later occurrence because a participant changes or because actual adverse truth begins again after actual cessation, not because another card, assessment, or flow visit exists.