F.11:11 - Worked examples
F.11:11.1 - ML service rollout
- Method: canary deployment strategy.
- MethodDescription: the versioned canary plan with traffic slices and rollback rules.
- Work: two dated canary deployment occurrences.
- Outputs: traffic-shifting commands, if material to the claim.
- Agency: the deploying System and its A.13 core, including the exact local agential kind, classification and obtaining assignment, are part of the independent Work-admission premise. Add F.6 only for a precise attribution through that same assignment; any responsibility claim keeps its own governor.
- Evidence: latency and error-rate observations about the Work; the plan’s approval is separate.
The example does not infer SLO satisfaction from the plan. F.12 evaluates the promise from Work outcomes in the stated window.
F.11:11.2 - Industrial furnace control
- Method: PID with feed-forward.
- MethodDescription: controller tuning sheet and program description.
- Work: the actual PLC task cycles in the stated interval.
- Outputs: setpoints and valve-duty values produced during those cycles.
- Evidence: temperature observations and their scale and unit basis.
If the IEC task expression and a PROV Activity expression are related for reporting, state that exact F.9 relation and loss. It does not create the Work-to-output or evidence relations.
F.11:11.3 - Clinical assay
The Method is ELISA; the MethodDescription is kit IFU v7; the Work is batch B217; robot commands are optional output detail; absorbance observations support the quality verdict. Any deviation from the IFU is an explicit description-use or conformance claim, not a property inferred from the four-question layout.
F.11:11.4 - Incident response
The Method is triage-first incident handling; the MethodDescription is the playbook and diagram; the Work is the handling of INC-3421 from 09:10 to 10:02. The handling duration, 52 minutes, is computed from observations of that Work. Command invocations are included only if a direct control or transformation claim needs them.