E.17.AUD:5 - Worked slices
E.17.AUD:5.1 - Local-head case
A semio note keeps saying this review and this interpretation, but nobody can tell which FPF kind or locally declared head those lexical heads name here. The rest of the publication unit under review is still locally stable once the local lexical head is repaired. The honest move is not broad publication-unit stabilization. It is Local Head Restoration.
E.17.AUD:5.2 - Whole-unit interpretation-shift case
A memo starts about one bounded architecture question over an inherited lineage or move, then shifts into wider rollout or approval language without declaring the transition. Repairing one sentence does not stabilize the publication unit under review because its concern and carried publication move have widened; that does not by itself establish a changed EntityOfConcern. The honest move is PublicationUnit Primary-Subject Discipline.
E.17.AUD:5.3 - Stable-unit comparison case
A comparison sheet already keeps one stable primary subject and one clear outside boundary to work, work planning, decision, gate, or reliance claim, but the team is using publication-unit instability language because the comparison is contentious. The honest move is not more publication-unit stabilization. It is E.17.ID.CR ComparativeReviewUnit.
E.17.AUD:5.4 - Explanation-laundering case
An onboarding explainer starts from one stable source-pinned note, but then the simplified prose begins to sound like canonical assurance or policy. The publication unit may still be readable, yet the main problem situation is no longer publication-unit stability. Leave publication-unit stability and use E.17.EFP’s simpler source-linked boundary sentence first; instantiate ExplanationFaithfulnessProfile only when explanation-class ambiguity still changes the next action.
E.17.AUD:5.5 - Downstream decision and reliance case
A status card starts as one bounded summary of progress, then quietly becomes the place where people infer approval, assignment, or go or no-go claim or effect. The problem is no longer only publication-unit stability. The honest move is to stop treating the card as if it were still only one neutral note and use the downstream decision, gate, work, or reliance publication.
E.17.AUD:5.6 - Quick contrasting cases
Use this quick contrast set when the first interpretation is still foggy:
| Near-miss case | What to look for | Honest next pattern or project reference |
|---|---|---|
LHR-only | one overloaded local lexical head is doing most of the semantic work while the publication unit under review otherwise stays stable | apply Local Head Restoration |
whole-unit interpretation shift | the publication unit under review quietly changes primary subject or carried publication move | apply PublicationUnit Primary-Subject Discipline |
stable comparison -> CR | the unit is already stable and the live problem situation is bounded comparison over pinned source publications | apply E.17.ID.CR ComparativeReviewUnit |
downstream claim or effect overread | readers are inferring approval, assignment, or go or no-go claim or effect from the publication unit | leave the publication-unit stability family for the more honest downstream decision, gate, work, or reliance publication |
modeling-lens hidden | the unit only makes sense because of one unpublished model, formal substrate, or rationale | publish that substrate or rationale briefly or use a heavier publication form or neighboring pattern |