C.30.P:1 - Problem frame

Working engineers often say “architecture” or “structure” while pointing at a useful artifact: a diagram, model, graph, table, dashboard, ADR, code-agent relation graph, neural-network architecture-operation diagram, benchmark result, or source document. Ordinary shorthand is acceptable in FPF-governed prose when the intended use is recoverable. If the artifact is named by a source label such as block, layer, expert, cache, router, or gate whose technical meaning remains unclear, use C.30.STRAT before assigning the recovered use locally.

The repair question is:

Which selected structure, architecture relation, architecture-description use, structural-view use, source-return relation, or neighboring claim does the wording name, and which FPF pattern defines or constrains that claim?

The architecture or structure use under repair may be:

• selected structure under A.22;
• an ArchitectureOf@Context claim under C.30, a thin architecture-description bridge under C.30, or the full architecture-description mechanism under C.30.AD;
• an ArchitectureStructuralView@Context or named C.30.* subcase;
• a publication, view, face, PublicationUnit, carrier, dashboard, ADR, source document, or source-return relation under C.2.P or E.17;
• a relation construction under A.6.P;
• a function or functionality-kind use under A.6.F;
• a mathematical-lens use claim under C.29;
• a characteristic, scale, score, coordinate, threshold, or quality-coordinate claim under C.16.P or C.16;
• a Q-bundle or quality-characterization claim under C.16.Q, C.25, or E.21;
• an evidence, assurance, gate, work, decision, causal-use, release, or method claim under its subject pattern;
• ordinary prose with no FPF-governed use being made.