F.9:2 - Problem frame

Cross-context work fails in predictable ways:

1. String-equals fallacy. Identical spellings such as “process”, “role”, “accuracy”, or “ready” are taken as identical meaning.
2. Relation-to-use jump. A true semantic correspondence is treated as sufficient for whatever comparison, substitution, translation, or publication is wanted next.
3. Design-run jumping. Design artefacts are substituted for run-time occurrences, or run-time occurrences are treated as design definitions.
4. Direction amnesia. A symmetric relation is read as two use licences, or narrower and broader senses are used in the unsafe direction.
5. Loss blindness. The proposed use does not name which differences it tolerates.
6. Evidence and permission collapse. A score, card, or assurance record is treated as the semantic relation, authorization, or proof that the use occurred.

F.9 answers these failures by separating the direct relation, the bounded-use proposition, reliance on that proposition, optional packaging, authorization, and any actual receiving object.