E.10.D2:8.2 - Scope, model use, grounding, evidence, and currentness

Use A.2.6 when the receiving use depends on the exact claim scope and its context-slice membership. Use A.1.1 when the receiving use depends on one exact BoundedModelUseStructure. Neither scope nor structure becomes a description constituent merely because a table displays it.

Use C.2.1 empirical grounding only when claims must be mapped to exact observation, intervention, measurement, or test relations involving one grounding holon. Use A.10 when the use relies on an exact evidence-provenance path; use B.3 when an assurance claim is made or its material-reliance threshold is met. Evidence, assurance, or an evaluation result can support an assertion about a description or its specification use; none makes the subject-side claim true, changes the EntityOfConcern, or mutates the description episteme. State the exact validity or reliance window when that receiving use depends on one.

Use G.11 when currentness of the description edition, evidence path, harness, viewpoint, publication, or another neighbor matters to the receiving use. A currentness judgment applies to that exact object or relation; it is not a generic status field of the EntityOfConcern.

Where claims cross reference schemes, first recover the exact F.17 source and receiving senses and the obtaining F.9 Bridge needed by the direct use. A separate current C.2.1 claim states whether that Bridge is suitable for the named bounded use, direction, correspondence rule, and loss tolerance; A.10 or B.3 separately governs reliance. A Bridge, profile, card, or shared spelling is neither a licence nor proof that comparison, translation, or work occurred.