C.32.MLAO:4 - Solution

Build a residual-reducing frame around one recoverable residual.

Work in eight steps:

Start from a C.30.ILC-compatible residual triage.
Name the affected declared holon-level refs or declared scope refs and the selected structures that carry the residual.
Name the architecture-characteristic criteria rows and any Q-Bundle slots that make the residual worth reducing.
Create or reference a C.32 candidate palette.
For each candidate, state the residual it reduces, the selected structure changed, and the criteria rows affected.
Assess the new burden, loss, exception, or source-return load that the candidate could create within the declared evolution window. State what is expected and unresolved; if none is identified, say which affected structures, scopes, and criteria were inspected.
Record the evolution window and any support that only keeps candidate plurality or directionality alive, such as NQD, OEE, an archive or front, stepping-stone retention, ideality, or BLP.
Stop at the frame, or name the pattern for the next question when a later claim is current: use A.19.CPM for explicit comparison, A.19.SelectorMechanism for set-returning selection, G.5 for selected-set result declaration, C.11 for local choice, C.32.PAD for an architecture decision, C.30.AD for architecture-description work, and C.29 for mathematical-lens use. For publication, use E.17 for a source-backed face and return to source, then E.24.PUB for the actual occurrence, form, carrier, audience, bounded use, and availability.

Admit a residual-reducing candidate only when it answers the working questions: which declared holon-level ref or declared scope ref is affected, which selected structure changes, which architecture-characteristic row or Q-Bundle slot is at stake, what residual is reduced, what structure is preserved or lost, and what new burden is expected or why none is currently identified.

Candidate change family	Use when	Repair it provides
`splitScope`	One scope carries incompatible tempo, functional demand, constraint, or admissibility condition.	Separates the conflict and names coordination cost.
`mergeScope`	Mediation creates more burden than separation saves.	Removes unnecessary boundary and names coupling risk.
`addMediator`	Direct cross-scope dependency is brittle.	Adds mediation and names mediator failure mode.
`addControlStructure`	Rate, feedback, policy, or supervisor conflict persists.	Adds or changes control relations, states timing burden, and names any direct control-responsibility predicate with actual participants; if none is admitted, records the exact missing governor instead of inferring responsibility from the control structure.
`addInterfaceGrammar`	Variation grows through unmanaged interface variants.	Names allowed variation, conformance expectation, and exception risk.
`repairFunctionBearerGap`	A residual-reducing functional change has no feasible bearer at the affected declared holon-level ref or scope ref.	Adds or changes an admitted bearer, splits the function, changes placement, resource access, or control relations, or rejects the candidate. Any responsibility change uses its direct domain predicate or exact missing governor.
`addEvidenceScope`	Reusable candidate bearer lacks reusable evidence scope.	Makes evidence maintenance part of the candidate. For a current evidence use, apply `A.10` for source recovery and bounded reliance, and the applicable subject rule to judge whether the evidence supports the named claim or meets the named requirement.
`addWorkMethodScope`	Repeated work remains bespoke because method structure is missing.	Proposes reusable method structure for the repeated work and names review or training burden.
`repairArchitectureInfluenceCorrespondence`	The residual is carried by mismatch between one exact typed influence-side architecture source and transformed-side architecture content for the changed referent.	Open `C.32.CONWAY`; keep the changed referent and any actual A.3.4 `U.Transformation` separate, then prepare candidate alternatives that change the influence-source side, change the transformed side, change both, or keep a bounded mismatch.
`acceptBoundedException`	Eliminating the residual costs too much now.	Records exception, source-return condition, and reopen trigger.

Comparison-input boundary. C.32.MLAO prepares comparison inputs; it does not run the comparison or choose a candidate. Its output rows are candidate records with residual reduced, new burden, selected structures, preserved structure, lost structure, source-return condition, and optional C.29 lens-output references.

Those references are diagnostic inputs only.

Admitted profiles and a ComparatorSpec belong to the receiving explicit-comparison pattern.

If the current claim is explicit comparison, use A.19.CPM with admitted profiles and a declared ComparatorSpec. If the claim is local choice over an existing option set, use C.11. If the claim is set-returning selection, use A.19.SelectorMechanism. If the claim is selected-set result declaration, use G.5. For publication, use E.17 for a source-backed face and source return and E.24.PUB for the publication occurrence and audience availability.

Lens-output discipline. Graphs, fronts, residual vectors, DSMs, RG-like descriptions, and frustration language are C.29 lens outputs, structural descriptions, or diagnostic signals after their architecture use is typed. The real failure is proxy preference: a candidate is preferred because the output looks better while selected structures, lost structure, architecture characteristics, and pattern for the next question remain unnamed. The repair is to interpret the output over selected structures and state what residual or loss it exposes; any comparison, selection, or choice claim then belongs to its pattern for the next question.

Method, culture, and episteme discipline. For a Method-family, culture, practice, or episteme case, first name the described holon, optimization question and use, selected structures, and the pattern that defines or constrains each load-bearing claim. If a publication family or publication face is in view, decide whether it is the described holon, a selected structure, an architecture description, or an MVPK face before using it. C.32.MLAO defines only the residual-reducing architecture candidate frame; use the applicable patterns for Method, Work, publication, evidence, ethical, and decision claims.

Dynamic candidate discipline. A preferred or retained candidate is bounded by an evolution window, source conditions, and the pattern for the next question that admitted the preference or retention. NQD, OEE, C.18, and C.19 can keep a front, archive, pool, or stepping stone visible; they do not select the architecture and they do not turn a front member into a durable optimum.

Ideality and BLP discipline. TRIZ ideality can suggest residual-reducing candidate changes: remove a support bearer, transfer a useful function onto an existing resource, or generalize a bearer so fewer selected structures carry more useful functions. BLP can prefer a more general scale-amenable bearer only inside its declared scale window and audit boundary. Both lines guide candidate generation; neither removes the need to state new burden, lost structure, and pattern for the next question.

Functional-bearer feasibility discipline. A residual-reducing candidate must name a bearer that could perform the function under the declared module, placement, resource, control, information, and evidence constraints. This is a design-time feasibility claim, not proof that the System, assignment, or Work already exists. An assignment supplies neither capability, functioning, function bearing, nor performance. If no feasible bearer can be proposed, add or change a candidate bearer, split the function, change placement, resource access, or control relations, reduce the demand, or mark the C.32 candidate unfit. Responsibility still needs an admitted direct predicate or the exact missing governor.

Architecture-influence and transformed-side discipline. When a residual is carried by one independently typed architecture-side source constraining architecture content for a changed referent, use C.32.CONWAY. For each actual side, keep the exact C.30 described holon, obtaining ArchitectureRelation, and selected U.Structure together; keep candidate, required, desired, or expected content in an exact C.30 ArchitectureClaim. Keep the changed referent and any actual A.3.4 U.Transformation separate. Then prepare residual-reducing candidates that change the influence-source side, the transformed side, both sides, or a bounded mismatch as comparison inputs or downstream candidate alternatives. Influence, transformation, flow, Work, and module-interface claims belong to their exact relation pattern, A.3.4, E.18, A.15, or A.6.M when current. Structural-similarity claims belong to C.29 only when they are current.

Level, stratification-term, and whole-reidentification discipline. If the case uses level, system level, holon level, layer, tier, or another stratification term, first use E.10.ARCH and C.30.STRAT unless the subject pattern and recovered neighborhood are already named by value. If the case uses BOSC, MHT, MET, MFT, emergence-family, boundary-crossing, or promotion-like wording, first use E.10 and B.2.P to recover the claim kind. Use B.2 only when a whole-reidentification question remains after the existing-whole explanation check; otherwise use the subject pattern for architecture, boundary, capability, function, measurement, publication, work, or lens claims.

Stop condition. Stop after the frame names residual, affected declared holon-level refs or declared scope refs, candidate changes, new burdens, preserved and lost structure, source-return conditions, and patterns for the next questions.

Lowering condition. Keep the frame as C.32.MLAO work only while the residual triage, affected level or scope refs, selected structures, criteria rows, evolution window, residual reduced, new burden, and pattern for the next question remain current. Lower a candidate to a diagnostic note when the residual is not recoverable, the selected structure is unknown or stale, the architecture characteristic is missing, the new burden is not named, or the pattern for the next question cannot use the row. Retire a candidate when its evolution window closes or a stronger residual triage replaces it. Use C.30.ILC when the residual itself is missing, C.32.ACS when criteria rows are missing, C.32.ACE when eval results are needed but not current, C.29 when the current claim is a mathematical-lens claim, and A.19.CPM, A.19.SelectorMechanism, C.11, G.5, or C.32.PAD when the downstream claim is current.