fpf.tools
Jump to text
On this page
Copy and source
Original source · lines 85346–85365
Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-14 19:58:00 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-14 19:58:38 UTC · last check 2026-10-15 02:35:10 UTC

C.40.OI:4.6 - Choose a worthwhile first result and enough inquiry

Identify a result that could improve the answer or next inquiry. Depending on what is already known, it may be:

  • a change-relevant characterization from C.40.OC;
  • materially different search leads from C.40.NU;
  • a worthwhile problem and proposed contribution from C.40.PC;
  • an admissible advising question or blocker from the applicable professional engagement Method; or
  • a qualified result from the practice that owns a missing premise.

Say what plausible answers would change: the next question, a possible contribution, a supported claim, an admissible action or a justified stop. When the future receiver is unknown, use the local exploratory question from §4.2. Discriminating explanations or discovering a useful operation can justify inquiry before an intervention is selected.

Compare the attainable inquiry with what the present basis already supports. A narrower answer, smaller probe, different source, deferral or stop may serve the use better. Compare their whole burdens under §4.5 and the protections, not uncertainty alone. Use C.11.DUA:4.1–4.4 when the connection between the receiving question, evidence demand and worthwhile continuation needs development. Qualitative judgement is enough when it settles that choice.

Select the affordable inquiry whose attainable contribution is worth that burden, or finish with the supported answer now. State what would be enough for this use before spending the selected budget: for example, one evidenced difficulty and a question that distinguishes two plausible contributions. This condition need not settle every unknown. If the inquiry cannot reach it within the permitted means, return the narrower supported result or exact gap; exhausting a budget supplies no missing evidence.

For an outside-practice contribution, A.15.9:4.1, steps 2–3, connects reuse of an available answer with the decision to obtain more. When acquisition is worthwhile, its later steps bound the request and qualify the returned result for use. Asking for it does not supply it.

Start at that selected contribution. Publication order does not require the earlier PatternIDs to be used.