E.18.1:5.3 - Pilot examples for transformation-flow structures and networks

These pilots are grounding checks, not source terminology to import. Before using one, decide which of three ontic cases is current: several valuations or path slices of one exact TFS; one parent-relative internal SubflowRef; or an E.18.NET network of independently identified TFS or nested-network members connected by exact already-obtaining cross-boundary relations. A diagram, common product, display order, shared Work or source wording decides none of them.

For one TFS, every valuation resolves to the same structure boundary and internal U.Transfer occurrences. For a network, every member retains its own boundary, Work, actual transformations, valuations and leaf-local position binding or DesignRunTag; exact cross-flow occurrences retain their defining predicates, signatures, participant order and endpoint bindings. Membership is acyclic; feedback relations may cycle when their own rules permit it. Use a pilot to check the carried object’s exact member-local position, the direct relation that crosses a boundary when one exists, and the smallest reopened member or continuation.

Pilot	P2W use being made	What it tests
Coffee service TFS	Accepted `ProblemCard@Context PC-COFFEE-SERVICE-17` keeps the service-temperature and throughput problem visible while each next claim opens separately: `C.29` returns `CoffeeHeatMassBalanceLensUse-17`; `A.6.0` returns `CoffeeFormalSubstrateSignature-v3` only for its declared subject and ranged value; `A.6.1` returns `CoffeeBrewHeatTransferMechanism-v2` and exact application bindings; `A.19.UNM` returns `CoffeeTemperatureNormalization-v4`; `A.3.1` returns `CoffeeBrewMethod-v5`; `A.15.2` returns `CoffeeShiftPlan-17`; `A.15.1` returns dated `CoffeeBrewWork-17-0815`; `C.16` returns the temperature and throughput measurements; and `G.11` reopens only a continuation relying on the changed source, normalization, Method or measurement. Treat them as positions or continuations of one TFS only while every use resolves to that same exact selected structure and internal transfers.	A signature supplies no mechanism or Method; a plan supplies no Work; telemetry supplies no measurement result until `C.16` applies it; another valuation or slice does not mint another TFS; refresh changes only the relation that relied on the changed value.
Compiler design and run	Compiler preparation/build, later compiler use, release assurance and product operation retain independently identified TFS values when their boundaries, Work or change cadence differ. Release-assurance use, launch-gate use, reproducible-build currentness and `G.11` source-currentness remain separate claims. Select an E.18.NET network only after the exact source-use, production/inception, operation-application, evaluation or other cross-member occurrences and endpoint bindings independently obtain.	No collapse of build, run and product Work; no giant flow; no universal `produces`/`uses` edge; local `DesignRunTag`; and no transformation, production, gate or currentness result from a build arrow or intended realization.
TAMP and MPC robotics	Method selection and `A.15.2` planning may be revised under a declared progress or budget condition before performed Work. That planning/replanning cycle may be one TFS valuation or path-slice family when the exact structure identity is shared; separately selected development, controller-execution and evaluation flows require E.18.NET and exact cross-member relations.	Branching and cycles without a fixed work procedure; a prospective launch decision remains distinct from later dated Work; and feedback cycles do not make membership cyclic.
AutoML and QD	Method selection returns a Pareto, QD, front or archive set under comparator and descriptor editions. If generation, evaluation and deployment are independently selected flows, relate them only through exact direct occurrences in E.18.NET. A changed descriptor, comparator or retained-set relation reopens only the dependent selection or publication continuation.	Set-return discipline, comparator currentness, no hidden scalarization, retained-set refresh, and no evaluation label used as a universal edge.
Freshness or physical-transport case	Work planning and performed Work depend on freshness windows, transport relations, units, reference planes and source-currentness. A detailed internal route remains a `SubflowRef`; independent transport and use flows require a network.	No implicit `latest`, no unbridged unit or plane comparison, exact member boundary, and smallest affected refresh.
Integration under module-interface constraints	After assembly, a result phrase may say role enactability under module-interface constraints or may point to evidence, a gate, architecture, function-like wording, or a Work relation.	Treat role enactability as unresolved wording and apply E.10.ROLE; then recover the local system-role kind and classification, assignment occurrence, direct participation or functioning relation, ordinary non-use, or exact missing governor that the current claim needs. Recover module-interface, evidence, gate, architecture, and Work claims separately under their own patterns; route claim-bearing function-like wording through A.6.F.
Tool-product-use network	One member contains exact dated tool-building Work, actual substrate changes, and only the local A.15.PROD production-work, inception, or completion claims that are current; another member uses the admitted tool through an exact operation-application or subject-use occurrence. In the concrete chain, a later member may use that tool to make a chair and another may use the chair as context for writing a text. Every current A.15.PROD claim and every direct tool-use or context relation must pass the test defined for it.	The same carried object may occupy a run-result, design-side input, tool, context, or constraint position in different members without changing kind. Exact source and use relations, together with the exact local A.15.PROD claims, connect members; a design tag, result label, or adjacency does not.
FPF pattern development and use network	One member carries exact drafting or repair Work and episteme-edition changes; quality evaluation, publication projection, admitted publication, later application to another EntityOfConcern and use-found evaluation remain separately identified values or members when independently selected. An evaluation member may return a defect through exact source-use, evaluation and change relations to the smallest affected development continuation.	Development, publication, application and evaluation remain separate; evidence stays outside practitioner prose; repair identifies the exact development object and applies the pattern for its change, rather than treating the publication as acting or every edit as production.