| LCA-as-proof | The text says the control stack proves safety, stability, or gate readiness. | Keep the control view and use the relevant dynamics, evidence, assurance, gate, or safety pattern for each proof or claim named by value. |
| Control-layer-as-generic-level | Layer, level, tier, or stack is used without a direct control relation, inter-layer relation, rate band, or B.2.5 supervisor-subholon relation. | Apply C.30.STRAT; use C.30.LCA only after a control-specific relation is recovered. |
| Agentive episteme, kind, or assignment | A policy, model, dashboard, local system-role kind, assignment, or architecture note is said to watch, decide, plan, or adapt. | Recover the direct control relation and participant meanings. For actual action, recover the exact performer through A.13 and admit the U.Work occurrence independently through A.15.1. Add assignment and F.6 only when precise assignment-bound attribution is expressly consumed; keep publication, source-to-use, work-reliance, authority, responsibility, gate, safety, and evidence relations separate. |
| Transformation-flow and LCA substitution | A transformation-flow graph expression is treated as control architecture, or an LCA diagram is treated as the transformation-flow graph expression. | Recover both exact selected structures and description epistemes separately; use E.17.0 only for actual viewpoint conformance. |
| Hidden rate claim | Multi-rate control is named, but rate adequacy is not checked. | Add rateSeparationClaimRefs?; use C.27.TA for temporal-aspect or rate-band claims and C.27 for authored temporal-claim adequacy. |