| AP-1 | String-equals becomes sense-equals | Same spelling is used as proof of identity. | Resolve the exact cells and test the least-committing relation profile. |
| AP-2 | Profile as use licence | Direction, use rule, or tolerated loss is placed inside profile identity. | Keep only relation semantics in the profile; state <u,d,r,t> in a separate C.2.1 claim. |
| AP-3 | Bridge-alone substitution | “A corresponds to B, therefore use A as B.” | Require both the obtaining Bridge and an affirmative bounded-use claim, then check A.10 or B.3 reliance. |
| AP-4 | Symmetry grants two directions | An Equivalence Bridge is treated as two approved substitutions. | State and test each proposed use direction separately. |
| AP-5 | Inclusion grants the reverse use | A broader sense is silently substituted for a narrower one. | Refine the endpoint senses and test the reverse relation and bounded use independently. |
| AP-6 | Assessment score grants use | CL=3 is cited instead of the exact rule, tolerance, and reliance path. | Treat the score as optional evidence shorthand; write and warrant the bounded-use claim. |
| AP-7 | Loss note becomes tolerance | An observed difference is treated as automatically acceptable. | Put observed loss in evidence and the accepted maximum in the claim’s t. |
| AP-8 | Card creates relation or permission | An approved or published card is cited as obtaining or authorization. | Test the Bridge independently and recover authorization under its direct governor. |
| AP-9 | Named proposed use becomes an actual occurrence | The claim says “publication use” or “comparison use”, so a publication or comparison is presumed. | Recover a publication occurrence under E.24.PUB; recover any comparison or other receiving object under A.15.1, C.2.1, A.6.1, or its direct domain-relation pattern. |
| AP-10 | Evidence failure erases the Bridge | A stale evidence path is said to make the semantic relation disappear. | Reopen reliance or the use claim; change the obtaining claim only when endpoint facts or the profile predicate changed. |
| AP-11 | Bridge as durable U-kind | A local correspondence is used to globalize meaning. | Keep kinds context-local unless the exact admission patterns independently admit a U-kind. |
| AP-12 | Silent relation composition | A-to-B and B-to-C are used as an A-to-C occurrence. | Test and individuate the direct A-to-C Bridge separately. |
| AP-13 | Description identity becomes occurrence identity | A description/Card C.2.1 triple or registry id is used to identify the world-side Bridge. | Apply BridgeOccurrenceIdentityRule to exact endpoints and profile; identify the description separately. |
| AP-14 | Same-locality Bridge | Two designations under one exact projection are forced into F.9. | Use ordinary designation and A.2.6 scope operations; no F.9 occurrence is current. |
| AP-15 | Bridge creates another subject fact | Semantic correspondence is said to create a local system-role kind or assignment, perform Work, authorize evidence, transfer status, admit a U-kind, publish an episteme, or relate model-use structures. | Use the pattern that defines that subject relation or state the missing-governor stop. |