C.26.2:4.11 - Evidence posture and confidence

EDSE claims become useful when the text says how much consequence the evidence can carry.

Evidence posture	Admissible use	Additional support requirement
`QLP-0` recognition	Flag a possible enacted state for discussion or triage.	Name bearer, work, carriers, and time window.
`QLP-1` local working use	Adjust local planning, incident response, or communication.	Add rivals, export loss, persistence, and reprobe condition.
`QLP-2` decision-bearing use	Use the distributed-state reading for a named decision whose answer needs more than the current local account.	Retain the needed case comparison, live rivals, near misses, and evidence-carrier distinctions; reuse adequate existing contributions.
`QLP-3` assurance use	Answer a named assurance question about the distributed-state reading, its empirical adequacy, or comparative advantage.	Apply A.10 for evidence provenance and bounded reliance and B.3 for that assurance claim and receiving use. Apply C.16 only if measurement is claimed, and keep authority or work requirements with their direct patterns. Reuse adequate existing support and its limits.

Publication or reuse under unchanged assumptions does not by itself raise the evidence posture. Select additional support from the receiving conclusion under C.26:12b.

For QLP-0 or low-consequence QLP-1, do not force persistence, decay, or reprobe-cost fields when the claim is explicitly momentary and the bounded action is local. Name the bearer, carriers, window, minimal reading, rival, practical change, and local stop; add the fuller temporal fields only when reuse, contest, or consequence makes them load-bearing.

The ordinary EDSE claim is minimal but actionable. It says: “this coordinated work or behavior supports this bounded reading for this use.” It does not say: “the collective has one hidden durable state that a report can copy.”