E.17.0:4.7 - Keep viewpoint-convention dependence direct

Use ViewpointConventionDependencyRelation(E_dependent,E_base) only when interpreting or replaying the fixed claims of exact dependent constituent episteme E_dependent depends on an exact criterion, law, public name, or method claim carried by exact base constituent episteme E_base, and replacing that base edition or making its exact used content unavailable can change the interpretation or replay. It is the A.6.6 base-dependence case specialized to viewpoint-convention constituents.

Citation, co-membership, reference resolution, compatible schemes, or a graph edge alone does not establish this predicate. For fixed endpoint editions, one positive occurrence r is participant-determined by <E_dependent,E_base>. Scope, time, status, evaluator, evidence, result, use, selection, representation, and publication are neither participants nor occurrence-identity discriminators.

ViewpointConventionDependencyRelationSignature is a separate RelationSignature episteme about the direct relation kind. It declares exactly:

The SlotSpecs declare reusable participant meanings and polarity. Their declaration does not make the relation obtain or identify an occurrence. The current A.6.6 vocabulary resolution chain is viewpointConventionDependsOn -> current vocabulary entry -> ViewpointConventionDependencyRelationSignature -> its EntityOfConcern, ViewpointConventionDependencyRelation. The NameToken, its separate NameCard, vocabulary entry, signature episteme, direct kind, and occurrence remain distinct; spelling or citation proves none of them equivalent and makes no occurrence obtain.

E.17.0:4.7.1 - Local designation of the direct relation kind; public row pending

The complete F.18 NameCard below is a durable local naming settlement. Core-facing reuse is proposed, but no current F.17 row or SenseCell accepts this value and sense; the card therefore remains pending and makes no public-row claim.

E.17.0:4.7.2 - Add only the neighboring object the receiving use needs

The compact positive statement may stop at “this exact constituent depends on that exact base constituent.” Add the following objects only under their positive trigger; do not flatten them into one witnessed-base record or add their fields to the two-participant relation.

D_dependencyUse is therefore the exact C.2.1 episteme identified through obtaining EpistemeConstitutionRelation(G_dependencyUse,r,S_decl). The ordered triple names the exact ClaimGraph, EntityOfConcern, and effective ReferenceScheme participants; it is not a self-constituting card or record and does not make the relation obtain.

When the structured branch is active, G_dependencyUse designates exact r and the receiving A.22 use: exact C_viewpoint, exact Q_org constraints applied, and the named admissible-use frame. It carries two separate claim values:

• c_dependencyObtains: exact direct predicate obtains, independently of use and evidence;
• c_dependencyAdmissibleForSelection: exact r is admissible among candidate organizing occurrences for that named use frame.

Both are claim values in G, not C.2.1 epistemes, occurrences, or decision results. Changing the use frame can change the second claim while r remains unchanged. Add exact U.ClaimScope or a time qualification to G only when it changes the represented claim; neither becomes a participant. Cite the exact current A.6.6 vocabulary entry and exact RelationSignature as declarations, not as r or proof of r. D is reidentified only when one of exact <G_dependencyUse,r,S_decl> changes; a changed claim value changes D only through changed constitutive G.

When J is present, keep separate conclusion nodes for the two claims and at least these distinct premises when they are actually relied on:

1. exact E_base under exact S_base carries the criterion, law, public name, or method claim used to interpret or replay E_dependent;
2. an exact system in exact interpretation or replay work, enacting an admitted method, resolves and applies that base content to E_dependent under exact S_dep; and
3. replacing exact base edition E_base or making its exact used content unavailable can change interpretation or replay of fixed exact E_dependent.

Designation, citation, graph location, co-membership, scheme compatibility, version difference alone, or a failed lookup supplies none of those premises. If the interpretation is method-dependent, cite the exact U.MethodDescription, but identify the acting system, admitted method, and work occurrence separately.

E.17.0:4.7.3 - Keep empirical and formal evaluation local

When empirical interpretation or replay testing is current, identify separately:

• H_dependencyEvaluator : U.System under A.1 as performer;
• exact RA_dependencyEvaluator : DependencyEvaluationWorkAssignment <: U.SystemRoleAssignment under A.2.1, with H_dependencyEvaluator in HolderSystemSlot, declaration-local assigned-kind domain DependencyEvaluatorSystemRoleKindDomain, and DependencyEvaluatorSystemRole as RA’s assigned-kind value admitted by that domain; the value, assignment, holder System, and Work remain distinct, and neither the value nor assignment acts;
• M_dependencyTest : U.Method under A.3.1 and, when needed, D_dependencyTest : U.MethodDescription under A.3.2; D describes M but is neither method, work, RelationSignature, nor OperationAlgebra, and a separate A.6.1 operation declaration is cited only when typed application is current;
• exact W_dependencyTest : U.Work: A.13 first recovers H as the exact actual performer through the already named obtaining RA; A.15.1 independently admits W as enacting M; because this branch expressly represents precise assignment-bound attribution, F.6 separately relates W to that same RA. F.6 identifies neither RA nor H, and a failed F.6 relation would leave W intact while removing only that attribution;
• exact B_dependencyEmpirical, a C.2.1 episteme identifying the model, calibration, assumptions, and interpretation basis; and
• exact result episteme T_dependency = <G_dependencyTestResult,E_dependent,S_test>, whose ClaimGraph designates exact E_base, predicate, method, conditions, basis, and positive or negative result.

Establish actual participation of E_dependent, E_base, each parameter, and B_dependencyEmpirical during W only through the exact relations that define those participation positions or A.6.1 operation-application bindings. A MethodDescription or compatible SlotSpec establishes no participation. Open a local A.15.PROD claim only when the receiving use needs to say W first constituted T or later completed its declared production; inception, completion, episteme identity, and dependency obtaining remain distinct.

When formal interpretation is current, constitute exact formal-evidence episteme E_dependencyProof = <G_dependencyProof,E_dependent,S_proof> and exact B_dependencyFormal identifying the theory, axiom set, proof semantics, and interpretation basis. Its ClaimGraph designates exact E_base, proof obligation, formal method, basis, and result. Preserve entailment, refutation, malformed input, timeout, and checker failure as different outcomes; neither a refutation nor a checker failure fabricates positive r. The proof episteme is distinct from r and its participants.

If reusable target claims are needed, constitute them separately under C.2.1:

• C_dependencyObtains has c_dependencyObtains as its principal claim and concerns the exact endpoint pair and predicate;
• C_dependencyDoesNotObtain carries a distinct negative principal claim and is not a state of the positive episteme; and
• C_dependencyAdmissibleForSelection concerns exact r under the named use frame and remains distinct from both obtaining claims.

Co-representation in one ClaimGraph does not merge these epistemes. T carries its empirical conclusion locally; E_dependencyProof carries its formal conclusion locally. If a target-claim episteme separately represents one conclusion, use C.29 only when representation correspondence matters—never as truth, use, or r. Mint no duplicate evidence-bearing relation and no new A.10 ontology.

Keep these three cases distinct:

1. exact r obtains while support for c_dependencyObtains is unknown; a selecting system may decline reliance without deleting or reidentifying r;
2. a negative empirical or formal result may support C_dependencyDoesNotObtain without presupposing r, fabricating D, or becoming a positive occurrence; and
3. T may support the claim that r obtains without supporting use-specific admissibility; a later decision method may consume empirical and formal result epistemes in separate declared premise slots and produce a separate C.11 result.

For historical reliance on a claim or result, use A.10 to recover its obtaining premise, decision-use, reference-use, or operation-argument relation for the named bounded use. Recover exact Work and its enacted Method only when that dated Work is itself a current claim or the expressly selected empirical evaluation branch above requires them. Retain that branch’s A.13 performer basis, independent A.15.1 Work admission, and F.6 when precise assignment-bound attribution is consumed. Storage, inspection, citation, attachment, production, graph membership, or adjacency alone does not establish that use. Keep empirical and formal algebras distinct; keep provenance and assurance with A.10, G.6, and B.3. Retain a missing-governor blocker instead of inventing a generic evidence, use, or acceptance relation.

E.17.0:4.7.4 - Schemes, scope, transformation, and change

Recover S_dep from E_dependent, S_base from E_base, and S_decl from D. They are three uses of existing U.ReferenceScheme, outside r and its RelationSignature. G may designate exact endpoints, claim values, and declared names through those schemes; designation is neither occurrence obtaining, truth, nor historical participation.

Keep claim-scope widen, narrow, and refit under A.2.6 when no local-sense translation is needed. Use translate only when scope membership must be expressed between exact local senses: require an obtaining F.9 Bridge between their exact SchemeSenseCell values, the separate affirmative claim for that translation’s direction, rule, and tolerance, and the current A.10 or B.3 reliance branch. Scheme difference, same spelling, token reuse, or translation intent triggers no Bridge.

Use A.6.3.RT when the dependency use needs a representation-scheme transition. Recover exact source and receiving epistemes and their construction, preservation, loss, and admissible use when that reliance-facing use requires them. Open RepresentationSchemeTransitionRelation@Context only when the actual transition occurrence is itself material and all six required participants—one independently selected BoundedModelUseStructure : U.Structure, the preserved EntityOfConcern, source and receiving representation epistemes, and source and receiving scheme-description epistemes—plus actual representation-transformation Work are independently recoverable. The @Context suffix is the retrieval label for that A.1.1 use, and Work belongs to the obtaining test rather than the participant tuple. Apply A.6.3.RT’s same-EntityOfConcern, preservation, loss or recoverability, and tuple-plus-scheme-pair identity rules; add a transition-description episteme only when its receiving use needs one. Add C.29 only for a current mathematical lens. Use F.9 separately when the claim actually needs a Bridge between distinct local senses. If interpretation or the proposed dependency use lacks a required basis, name that exact gap and block only that use; the absence of a six-participant transition occurrence or Bridge by itself blocks neither the direct dependency judgment nor a supported exact construction.

Changing only J, an assertion or occurrence description, evaluation result, basis, provenance, production, later-use relation, or representation leaves r unchanged while its endpoint pair is fixed. It also leaves D unchanged while exact <G_dependencyUse,r,S_decl> is fixed. Unknown support does not make an obtaining r non-obtaining, and support for a negative claim creates no positive r. A changed representation transition invalidates judgments that depended on that transition, but changes r only when an endpoint episteme or the direct predicate also changes.

Progressive stopping rule. Use the lightest sufficient rung: readable dependency assertion; reusable RelationSignature when declaration reuse matters; D only for a named A.22 selection-use claim; J only for inspectable inference; evaluation work and exact participation only when evaluation is current; local A.15.PROD only for a needed result-inception or completion claim; provenance, assurance, representation transition, mathematical lens, scope translation, and Bridge only at their own triggers. No higher rung proves a lower-rung occurrence.