E.10.ROLE:5 - Archetypal Grounding — Worked Slices

E.10.ROLE:5.1 - Alice Is Reviewer

“Alice is reviewer” may stay as readable recognition prose when no technical classification claim is consumed. If only the local kind matters, identify ReviewerSystemRole through C.3 and A.2. If a technical classification judgment matters, use A.2 and C.3.2 and keep Alice, ReviewerSystemRole, the current KindSignature edition, the context slice, and the true | false | unknown result recoverable. If assignment identity matters, first name the declared assignment species JournalReviewAssignmentRelation and establish that its direct predicate obtains for the actual participants, including Alice as holder, under the stated applicability. Only then identify ReviewAssignment-82 as the occurrence and state its extent. A roster, appointment label, description, or evidence item may support the assignment claim but does not make the assignment obtain. If performed Work matters, first recover Alice’s A.13 core for this action and independently admit ReviewWork-82 under A.15.1. Because this branch also says that Alice performed the Work under ReviewAssignment-82, F.6 afterward relates the already admitted Work to that same assignment. Classification, assignment, Work, and attribution remain separate. None follows merely from the ordinary sentence. A short projection may omit an assignment identifier unused by its receiving claim only when every relation the claim consumes remains recoverable.

E.10.ROLE:5.2 - A Report Plays a Role in Approval

The report is an episteme. For the evidence-use reading established by the source, write “reviewers used Report-R as evidence for ApprovalClaim-C”, then use A.10 for the evidence-provenance account and B.3 only when an actual named assurance claim is current, including when an applicable material-reliance threshold requires that claim.

E.10.ROLE:5.3 - API Provider Role

“The API role is provider” does not yet reveal which claim is meant. It may hide several claims, but the wording alone does not establish that; recover the intended claim before selecting and applying a rule. First ask whether a provider System is current and whether its classification under a local provider system-role kind matters. If the assignment itself matters, name its declared assignment species and the obtaining occurrence separately; do not infer either from root-family typing or the word role. Provision, service, declaration, interface, schema position, publication, promise, and access claims each use their own pattern. Only when provider Work is current, recover every precise performer’s A.13 core and independently admit the dated Work under A.15.1. Add F.6 afterward only if this provider account also needs precise assignment-bound attribution through the same obtaining assignment.

E.10.ROLE:5.4 - Passive Test Article

A passive test article may independently pass A.1 and be classified under TestArticleSystemRole. If an assignment claim matters, name its declared assignment species before identifying an occurrence. Neither classification nor assignment makes the article an agent or performer. The role-bearing source claim to recover is: TestArticle-7 participates passively in TestWork-9 during TestInterval-9; its intended participant order is article, Work, then applicability interval. No current pattern supplies a direct passive-participation predicate with those participants, applicability, and occurrence identity, so the current result is the A.6.RCD missing-governor for that exact attempted claim. Any tester or test-rig Work first reuses every precise performer’s A.13 core and is independently admitted under A.15.1; add F.6 only when the tester account also needs precise assignment-bound attribution. A short projection may omit an unused assignment identifier, but it keeps the article, Work, interval, and missing relation recoverable.