First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
397 patterns · 10426 sections
Choose a heading to read that text in full, or open the complete publication.
Table of contents
In the published reading order. Pattern IDs are stable references, not sequence numbers.
- Table of Contents
First Principles Framework (FPF) Readme
- Start here
Practical entries
- LIVE-WORK-STEERING — Choose the next action while Work is changing
- METHOD-RECOVERY — Explain what reusable way several performances may show
- PROFESSIONAL-RESULT — Use one result from another practice without transferring the decision
- NAMING — Give one identified thing a usable name
- SYSTEM-RECOGNITION — Test systemhood only when it changes the decision
- TIME — Decide what a timing claim lets you do
- CAUSAL-USE — Keep a causal-looking result within its support
- MEASUREMENT — Make a number interpretable before relying on it
- MATHEMATICAL-MODELING — Obtain a useful consequence from a representation
- METHOD-CONSTRUCTION — Construct, connect and change methods for practical use
- WORK-OPPORTUNITY — Find a useful continuation before proposing change
- COMMUNICATION-FOR-USE — Make communication useful, then learn from what happens
- RESULT-TO-NEXT-MOVE — Route an obtained result to the next probe or option
- ACTUAL-TEMPORAL-STRUCTURE — Recover what actually obtains before testing coordination
- CONSEQUENCE-BEARERS — Find omitted Systems before closing a decision
Practical-Use Cards
- UNFAMILIAR-THEORY - Make an unfamiliar theory usable
- ARCHITECTURE — Carry an outside need through structure and feedback
- PRACTICE-ARCHITECTURE — Connect methods with their use, support and development
- WORKING-DOCUMENTS — Make a document answer one use
- OPTION-COMPARISON — Keep unlike option results distinct
- PROBLEM-SHAPING — Stop at the earliest honest problem-side result
- IMPROVEMENT — Define better before repeating change
- WORDING — Repair language without replacing the project question
- SOTA-PORTFOLIO — Move from a plural field to the cheapest useful result
- SYSTEM-DELIMITATION — Separate parts, selected boundary, and crossings
- Decide Whether FPF Fits
- When Several Transformation Flows Form One Network
- Perform several levels of work through one action
- Recover a lost path from outside use to recursive builders
- One-Minute Example
- What FPF Is
- What FPF Is Not
- How to Use This Repository
- License and reuse
- Citation
First Principles Framework Architectural Reference (non-normative)
- FPF.Reference:2 - FPF As A Project, Not Only A Pattern List
- FPF.Reference:3 - Why FPF Exists
- FPF.Reference:4 - Creativity And Assurance Mature Together
- FPF.Reference:5 - Local Closure Inside An Open World
- FPF.Reference:6 - FPF As An Evolutionary Architecture For Thought
- FPF.Reference:7 - Architectural Characteristics Of Thought
- FPF.Reference:8 - Beyond Bias Hunting
- FPF.Reference:9 - Thinking Through Writing
- FPF.Reference:10 - Thinking-Oriented Architecture, Not A Descriptive Upper Ontology
- FPF.Reference:11 - When A Scale Claim Calls For Comparison
- FPF.Reference:12 - From Flat Documents To Multi-View Truth
- FPF.Reference:13 - Architecture As Structure Of Holons
- FPF.Reference:14 - Boundary Statements
- FPF.Reference:15 - Raising Semantic Precision
FPF.Reference:16 - Big FPF Storylines
- FPF.Reference:16.1 - Follow one question through several contributions
- FPF.Reference:16.2 - Architectural Rationale
- FPF.Reference:16.3 - Shared sources and the choices they support
- FPF.Reference:16.4 - What to examine when adapting the arrangement
FPF.Reference:16.5 - Construct a usable whole with existing methods
- FPF.Reference:16.6 - Develop a useful way from received material
FPF.Reference:16.7 - Develop and use methods with distinct claims and results
- FPF.Reference:16.7.1 - Method, MethodDescription, WorkPlan, and Work remain distinct
- FPF.Reference:16.7.2 - Several structures and several views can coexist
- FPF.Reference:16.7.3 - Reader route and result dependencies do not prescribe Work order
- FPF.Reference:16.7.4 - Status, evidence, and assurance decisions are preserved
- FPF.Reference:16.7.5 - What this Method-development family foregrounds and leaves outside
- FPF.Reference:16.7.6 - Why these Method-development questions stay separate
FPF.Reference:16.8 - Produce pattern-language knowledge and use it under changing conditions
- FPF.Reference:16.8.1 - Situation, problem and first gain
- FPF.Reference:16.8.2 - Production and situated use are different contributions
- FPF.Reference:16.8.3 - Unfolding a use, including a changed situation
- FPF.Reference:16.8.4 - Practical checks, recurring failures and costs
- FPF.Reference:16.8.5 - Architectural Rationale and source comparison
- FPF.Reference:16.8.6 - Relations and scope of the whole account
FPF.Reference:16.9 - Choose the smallest Method-development result needed for release EC-417
- FPF.Reference:16.9.1 - 1. Bound the EC-417 receiving result and recover the subjects of its management accounts
- FPF.Reference:16.9.2 - 2. Choose the subject before redesigning it
- FPF.Reference:16.9.3 - 3. Separate observed differentiation, causal support, and today’s decision
- FPF.Reference:16.9.4 - 4. Recover candidate accounts only when ordinary Method recovery is insufficient
- FPF.Reference:16.9.5 - 5. Build the repertoire and criteria without preselecting an architecture
- FPF.Reference:16.9.6 - 6. Recover package contributions and qualify individual subjects
- FPF.Reference:16.9.8 - 8. Return a proposed-whole account and a bounded trial
- FPF.Reference:16.9.10 - 10. Apply sensitivity without rewriting past Work
- FPF.Reference:16.9.11 - Result and stop
- FPF.Reference:17 - Transdisciplinarity As A Meta-Theory Of Thinking
- FPF.Reference:18 - The Culinary Architecture Of Collective Thought
- FPF.Reference:19 - The Intellect Stack As A Pedagogical Map
- FPF.Reference:20 - Purpose, Scope, And Non-Goals
- FPF.Reference:21 - How To Continue After The readme
- FPF.Reference:End
Part A - Kernel Architecture Cluster
- A.0 - Generative Search Onboarding Glossary (NQD & E/E‑LOG)
- A.1 - Recognize a Whole with Parts (U.Holon and Admitted Holon Kinds)
- A.1.RI - Reidentifying an Object across Observations
- A.1.1 - Bounded Model-Use Structure: Applicability, Use and Expression Coherence (DDD Bounded Context)
- A.1.SCR - Finding the Acting or Changed System
- A.1.CSD - Discovering Systems That May Bear Consequences
- A.1.STM - Find the First Unsupported Project Dependency (System-Thinking Long Mantra)
- A.2 - System-Role Kinds and Assignments
- A.2.1 - U.SystemRoleAssignment - Contextual System-Role Assignment
- A.2.2 - System Capability: Conditions, Measures and Fit
- A.2.3 - U.PromiseContent — Promised Outcomes and Acceptance Criteria
- A.2.4 - Episteme Evidence-Use and Status-Use Relations
- A.2.5 - SystemRoleAssignmentStateRelation - Assignment-State Recognition for Work Admission
- A.2.6 - Unified Scope Mechanism (USM): Test Scope Membership and Combine Scopes
- A.2.7 - SystemRoleKindRelationStructure - Relations among System-Role Kinds
- A.2.8 - U.Commitment — Individual Duties to Act or Refrain
- A.2.8.PER - Granted Permission, Exercise, and Non-Prohibition
- A.2.9 — U.SpeechAct — Communicative Work and Its Intended Use
- A.3 - Transformer Quartet: Distinguish Work, Performer, Method and Method Description
- A.3.1 - U.Method: Reusable Way of Doing with Explicit Applicability
- A.3.1.MR - Candidate-Method Recovery from Work Evidence
- A.3.1.DR - Recover Method Contributions from Documentary Sources
- A.3.1.QM - Qualify a Method for Its Intended Contribution
- A.3.1.WT - Design and Interpret a Method Work Trial
- A.3.1.CC - Check the Coherence of a Method Claim
- A.3.1.FT - Qualify Method Fit and Transfer
- A.3.1.MV - Construct and Maintain a Method Variant
- A.3.1.MI - Introduce a Method into Practice and Decide What to Keep or Change
- A.3.2 - U.MethodDescription: Description Episteme for a Way of Doing
- A.3.2.DE - Describe a Method for Its Intended Use
- A.3.3 - U.Dynamics: State-Space and Transition-Law Episteme
- A.3.3.CC - Construct a Configuration Description under Constraints
- A.3.3.TR - Construct a Rule for State Change
- A.3.3.PI - Retain the Information Needed for Prediction
- A.3.4 - U.Transformation: Actual Bounded Change Under Conditions
- A.3.4.P - Transformation Wording Repair: Recover Objects and Claims
- A.4 - Compare a System’s Intended Design with Its Operating Conditions
- A.5 - Open-Ended FPF Kernel and Extension Layering
Cluster A.IV.A - Signature Stack & Boundary Discipline (A.6.*)
- A.6 - Signature Stack: Classify and Place Boundary Claims
- A.6.RSIG - Recognition Signatures: Find the Defining Episteme for a Description
- A.6.B — Boundary Norm Square (Laws / Admissibility / Deontics / Work‑Effects)
- A.6.C — Contract Unpacking for Boundaries
- A.6.REL - Relation Obtaining and Individuation: Distinguish Occurrences When Needed
- A.6.0 - U.Signature - Reusable Law-Governed Declaration Episteme
- A.6.1 - U.Mechanism - Reusable Law-Governed Operation Declaration
- A.6.2 - Effect-Free Episteme Morphing: Laws for Mathematical Relations Between Epistemes
- A.6.3 - Episteme viewing - EntityOfConcern-preserving episteme construction
- A.6.3.CSC - Controlled Semantic Coarsening: Shorten an Account for a Bounded Use
- A.6.3.CR - ConservativeRetextualization: EntityOfConcern-Preserving Textual Re-Expression
- A.6.3.RT - Representation-Scheme Transition: Change Representation of the Same EntityOfConcern
- A.6.3.RT.OE - Construct an Operative Expression
- A.6.3.NAR - Structure-to-Narrative Rendering
- A.6.4 - EntityOfConcern Retargeting: Judge a Bounded Use Across Different Entities
- A.6.P - Relational Precision Restoration - Recovering Direct Relations from Under-Specified Claims
- A.6.P.RI - Recover Agent-Relative References for Action
- A.6.P.WMR - Exact Relation Recovery for Method and Work Claims
- A.6.RCD - Needed Relation Claim Derivation and Relation-Kind Admission
- A.6.RSIR - Relation, Signature, Interface, Role, and Slot Precision Restoration
- A.6.A - Affordance and Action-Invitation Precision Restoration (ACT-INV)
- A.6.F - Function and Functional Precision Restoration (RPR-FUNCTION)
- A.6.M - Module and Interface Claim Repair
- A.6.5 - Relation-Declaration Slot Discipline - SlotKind, ValueKind, RefKind, and participant-designation discipline
- A.6.6 - Base Declaration Discipline: Say Exactly What Something Depends On
- A.6.7 - MechSuiteDescription — Shared Conditions for Joint Use of Distinct Mechanisms
- A.6.9 - Cross-Context Sameness Disambiguation - Restoring the concrete claim behind “same”, “equivalent”, and “align” (RPR-XCTX)
- A.6.S - TargetSignature and optional ConstructorSignature - demand-driven signature engineering
- A.6.H - Wholeness Language Unpacking — RPR-WHOLE
Cluster A.V - Constitutional Principles of the Kernel
- A.7 - Strict Distinction: Repair Conflations of FPF Objects (Clarity Lattice)
- A.7.1 - Consequence-Guided Ontological Problem Solving
- A.7.2 - FPF Ontology-Premise Reconciliation
- A.7.CP - Constructive-Premise Compact and Reasoning-Basis Use
- A.8 - Universal Core Principle: Test a U-Kind Across Domains
- A.9 - Choose and Check an Aggregation Law for the Intended Result
- A.10 - Evidence Graph Referring: Claim-Bound Evidence and Provenance Graph
- A.10.1 - Revalidate Affected Uses When a Relied-on Source Changes
- A.11 - Ontological Parsimony
- A.11.OP - Decision-Relevant Least Action and Operational Parsimony: Test a Proposed Requirement
- A.12 - Acting-Side Externalization and Reflexive Split: Identify Who Acts on What
- A.13 - The Agential Role & Agency Spectrum
- A.14 - Advanced Mereology: Components, Portions, Aspects & Phases
- A.15 - System-Role–Method–Work Alignment
- A.15.1 - U.Work: Dated Performed Work Occurrence
- A.15.2 - U.WorkPlan: Plan Content for Coordinating Future Work
- A.15.3 - SlotFillingsPlanItem: Plan a Value for an Existing Declaration Member
- A.15.4 - Work-Relevant Appearance-Based Reliance Repair
- A.15.5 - Work-Entry Readiness and Full-Kit Preparation
- A.15.6 - Recover What Project, Process, or Case Wording Refers To
- A.15.7 - Situation-Responsive Work Steering and Next-Action Selection
- A.15.8 - Work-Performance Configuration and Recovery Testing
- A.15.8.MS - Configure Methodological Support for Work
- A.15.9 - Use or Request a Bounded Result from Another Practice
- A.15.10 - Resume Interrupted Work
- A.15.11 - Make Applicable Methods Noticeable in Work
- A.15.PROD - Production Work, Entity-Identity Inception, and Production Completion Recovery
- A.16 - Language-State Moves: Choose the Next Publication and Use of a Cue or Claim
- A.16.0 - Keep an Episteme’s Language-State and Publication History Recoverable
- A.16.1 - PreArticulationCuePack: Preserve an Early Cue Before Choosing Its Use
- A.16.2 - Reopen, SketchBackoff, Respecify, or Retire a Language-State Publication
- A.17 - Canonical “Characteristic” (A.CHR-NORM): Name What Is Measured
- A.18 - Minimal CSLC in Kernel (Characteristic ⟷ Scale ⟷ Level ⟷ Coordinate) (A.CSLC‑KERNEL)
- A.19 - CharacteristicSpace: Coordinates, State Predicates and Dynamics Hook (A.CHR‑SPACE)
- A.19.ECS - Evaluation CharacteristicSpace Construction: Define What Counts as Better
- A.19.SPR - Repair State and Status Wording
- A.19.SOURCE-SET-SPACE-SUBSTRATE - Source-Set and Search/Outcome-Space Substrate
- A.19.DECLARED-SUBSTRATE-INTERPRETIVE-VIEW - Interpretive Views of Declared Source Sets and Search/Outcome Spaces
- A.19.CN - CN-frame: Specify and Maintain Comparability and Normalization
- A.19.CHR - CHRMechanismSuite: Shared Rules for Characterization and Selection
- A.19.UNM - Normalize Coordinate Values under Declared Invariants (UNM)
- A.19.UINDM - Indicatorization (UINDM): Select Indicators Under a Declared Policy
- A.19.USCM - Unified Scoring Mechanism, USCM
- A.19.ULSAM - Unified Lawful Scale Aggregation Mechanism (ULSAM)
- A.19.CPM - Compare Admitted Profiles under a Declared Comparator (CPM)
- A.19.SelectorMechanism - Unified Selection Kernel, SelectorMechanism
- A.20 - Constraint Validity for Transformation Steps
- A.21 - Gate Decisions from Independent Check Results
- A.22 - Structure and Structural Views (STRUCT-CAL)
- A.22.CGUS - Which Continuations Are Available? — Constraint-Governed Unfolding Structure (CGUS)
Part B - Trans-disciplinary Reasoning Cluster
- B.1 - Holon Aggregation and Part-Whole Construction
- B.1.1 - Dependency Structure and Relation Grounding
- B.1.2 - Coordinate Decisions About System Aggregation and Delimitation
- B.1.3 - Knowledge Aggregation (Γ_epist): Synthesis and Target-Scheme Compilation
- B.1.4 - Specify Order-Sensitive or Temporal Aggregation (Γ_ctx, Γ_time)
- B.1.5 - Gamma_method - Order-Sensitive Method Composition and Work Enactment
- B.1.5.EW - Recover How Constituent Actions Enact Encompassing Work
- B.1.5.RS - Evaluate a Constituent Method Replacement in Its Encompassing Uses
- B.1.5.CM - Construct and Qualify a Composite Method
- B.1.6 - Work-Resource Aggregation
- B.2 - Meta-Holon Transition - Whole Reidentification
- B.2.P - Clarify Emergence and Meta-Holon Transition (MHT) Claims
- B.2.2 - Meta-System Transition: Test the Proposed New Whole as a System
- B.2.3 - Meta-Holon Transition With Episteme Result
- B.2.4 - Do Capability or Functioning Changes Require Whole Reidentification?
- B.2.5 - Supervisor-Subholon Feedback Relation
- B.3 - Is This Claim Supported for This Use? — Trust and Assurance Calculus
- B.3.3 — Assurance Subtypes & Levels
- B.3.4 - Can Earlier Evidence Still Support This Use? — Evidence Decay and Epistemic Debt
- B.3.5 - Assurance Grounding for Working-Model Relation Claims (CT2R-LOG)
- B.4 - Coordinate Repeated Adaptation (Canonical Evolution Loop)
- B.4.1 - Publish Candidate Routes for a Stabilized Cue (RoutedCueSet)
- B.5 - Choose the Next Reasoning Contribution (Canonical Reasoning Cycle)
- B.5.EA - Articulate a Working Distinction from Experience
- B.5.WN - Develop Lines of Thought with Working Notes
- B.5.MPC - Connect Physical, Mathematical and Computational Reasoning
- B.5.MPC.R - Repair a Physical-Mathematical-Computational Connection
- B.5.RC - Recover a Construction from Its Description
- B.5.RA - Recover an Argument for Its Next Use
- B.5.RR - Revise Reasoning After a Premise or Question Changes
- B.5.FM - Construct a First Model for the Working Question
- B.5.TU - Construct a Working Use of an Unfamiliar Theory
- B.5.TC - Compare Theoretical Accounts for a Working Question
- B.5.QD - Develop a New Question from a Result or Construction
- B.5.QD.CF - Reformulate a Problem by Examining Its Conflicting Assumptions
- B.5.1 - Coordinate Development States: Explore → Shape → Evidence → Operate
- B.5.2 - Generate and Compare Candidate Explanations (Abductive Loop)
- B.5.2.0 - Question Form for Entering Abduction (U.AbductivePrompt)
- B.5.2.1 - Instrument Abductive Hypothesis Generation with Novelty–Quality–Diversity (NQD)
- B.5.3 - Interpret Domain Vocabulary for an FPF Claim (Domain-Concept Bridge)
- B.5.4 - Recognize a Reusable Concept in a Concrete Situation
- B.5.PI - Initiate Inquiry from Ongoing Work
- B.5.SD - Construct a Useful Answer through Substantive Discussion
Part C - Kernel Extension Specifications
- C.2 - Epistemic holon composition (KD-CAL)
- C.2.1 - U.Episteme: Constitution, Empirical Grounding, and Edition Relations
- C.2.P - Clarify Episteme, Publication, and Source Wording (Epistemic Precision Restoration)
- C.2.2 - Reliability R in the F–G–R triad
- C.2.2a - U.LanguageStateSpace - Language-state chart over U.CharacteristicSpace
- C.2.3 - Unified Formality Characteristic F
- C.2.LS - U.LanguageStateFacetProfile - Thin profile bundle for language-state facets
- C.2.4 - U.ArticulationExplicitness — How Explicit Is an Episteme’s Meaning for Its Use?
- C.2.5 - U.LanguageStateClosureDegree — How Fixed Is the Current Candidate Space?
- C.2.6 - U.LanguageStateAnchoringMode — How Is the Episteme Anchored?
- C.2.7 - U.LanguageStateRepresentationFactorBundle — How Is the Representation Organized?
- C.2.8 - U.ExtractableStructuralInformation — Structure This Reader Can Recover
- C.2.P.DR - Repair Claims Based on Declarative Form Alone (Declarative Representation Precision Restoration)
- C.3 - Kinds, Intent and Extent, and Typed Reasoning
- C.3.1 - Kind Identity and Subkind Relations (U.Kind and U.SubkindOf)
- C.3.2 - Kind Intent, Membership Judgment, and Extension
- C.3.3 - KindBridge and CL^k — Correspondence between Distinct Kinds
- C.3.4 - KindUseAdaptationDeclaration — Tailor the Use of an Existing Kind
- C.3.5 - KindAT — Intentional Abstraction Facet for Kinds (K0…K3)
- C.3.A - Typed Guard Macros for Kinds + USM (Annex)
- C.11 - Decision Theory (Decsn-CAL)
- C.11.CRC - Configuration-Relative Contribution Comparison
- C.11.DBR - Reconsider a Decision When Its Relied-on Basis Changes
- C.11.DUA - Make Advice and Evidence Demands Worth Their Burden
- C.11.MV - Compare the Worth of a Method Option
- C.13 — Constructional Mereology (Compose‑CAL)
- C.16 - Measurement & Metrics Characterization (MM‑CHR)
- C.16.MR - Construct a Measurement Relation
- C.16.IR - Determine What a Measurement Indication Can Resolve
- C.16.RM - Repair a Measurement Model or Arrangement
- C.16.P - Restore Precision to Characteristic and Scale Wording
- C.16.Q - Quality-Term Precision Restoration
- C.17 - Characterising Generative Novelty and Value
- C.18 - Open-Ended Search Archive and Front Stewardship
- C.18.1 - Scaling‑Law Lens Binding (SLL)
- C.19 - Explore-Exploit Live-Pool Governor
- C.19.1 - Bitter‑Lesson Preference (BLP)
- C.19.2 - Use-Bounded Apparatus Application
- C.20 - Composition of U.Discipline (Discipline-CAL)
- C.21 - Field Health & Structure (Discipline-CHR)
- C.22 - Task Typing and TaskSignature Assignment (Problem-CHR)
- C.22.1 - Task-family adaptation signature
- C.22.PFR - Problematic-For Relation
- C.22.2 - ProblemCard
- C.23 - MethodFamily Evidence & Maturity (Method‑SoS‑LOG)
- C.24 - Plan Tool or Service Calls for a Fixed Action (C.Agent-Tools-CAL)
- C.25 - Q-Bundle: Express a Quality Claim as One Characteristic or a Structured Bundle
- C.26 - Quantum-Like Modeling Lens
- C.26.1 - Probe-Coupled Boundary Interaction
- C.26.2 - Enacted Distributed State Evidence
- C.26.3 - Viability-Envelope Boundary Regulation
- C.27 - Temporal Claim Adequacy: State Readings, Temporal Trends, and Intervention-Sensitive Change
- C.27.TA - Temporal Aspect: Time Windows, Rhythm, Cadence, and Currentness
- C.28 - CausalUse-CAL: Causal-Use Questions, Identification, and Realizability
- C.28.CM - Construct and Challenge a Causal Model
- C.28.MR - Derive an Intervention Consequence by Mechanism Replacement
- C.29 - Mathematical Lens Use
- C.29.1 - Mathematical Result Transfer
- C.29.2 - Computational Formulation
- C.29.3 - Computational Realization
- C.29.BB - Construct a Balance across a Boundary
- C.30 - Grounded Architecture and Selected-Structure Adequacy
- C.30.AD - Architecture Description Adequacy
- C.30.AD.BA - Built-Asset Architecture Description and Reference Designation
- C.30.P - Clarify Architecture and Structure Wording (Precision Restoration)
- C.30.STRAT - Clarify Stratification and Architecture Source Labels
- C.30.ASV - Architecture Structural View Adequacy (ASV)
- C.30.LCA - Control Structure View Adequacy (LCA)
- C.30.ILC - Cross-Scope Architecture Residual Triage
- C.30.TFS-REL - Use Transformation-Flow Structures and Networks in Architecture
- C.31 - Modularity and Reusable Structure Characteristics
- C.31.RSA - Reusable Structure Accounting
- C.31.ASAP - Which Architecture Is Preferable Under Scale? (Scale Amenability)
- C.32 - Architecture Candidate Synthesis
- C.32.P2S - Problem-to-Structure Architecturing Unfolding
- C.32.HCS - Architecture-Bearing Family Characteristic Starter Packs
- C.32.ACS - Architecture Characteristic Criteria Set
- C.32.ACE - Architecture Characteristic Eval Programs
- C.32.CONWAY - Architecture-Influence and Transformed-Architecture Correspondence
- C.32.MLAO - Architecture Candidates to Reduce Cross-Scope Residuals
- C.32.MWA - Synthesize an Architecture Account of Methods and Their Use
- C.32.MWA.PP - Construct and Compare Method Performance and Provision Arrangements
- C.32.FAIL - Architecture Failure Recognition and Repair
- C.32.PAD - Project Architecture Decision After Candidate Synthesis
- C.32.ADR - Architecture Decision Record Projection
- C.32.ADA - Architecture Decision Adequacy Scales
- C.33 - Assess Structural Information for Architecture Use
- C.34 - Assess Structural Correspondence for Architecture Use (Equivalence and Morphisms)
- C.35 - Assess Generated or Discovered Results for Architecture Use
- C.36 - Cultural Evolution and Cultural-Evolution Engineering
- C.37 - Select and Use Representations for One Action
- C.37.MP - Maintain a Method Representation Profile
- C.37.CF - Compare Content and Form Changes
- C.38 - Construct Comparable Ways to Obtain One Result
- C.39 - Find and Develop a Way to Obtain a Result
- C.39.RO - Turn a Construction into a Reusable Operation
- C.39.MF - Choose and Reopen a Method Development Focus
- C.39.RP - Organize a Repertoire for Method Development
- C.39.RQ - Construct Situated Method Requirements
- C.39.MC - Continue Method Development from Changed Conditions
- C.40 - Develop Branching Search from Reusable Material
- C.40.CD - Develop Problems and Ways of Solving Them Together
- C.40.CU - Develop a Useful and Reproducible Use of a Construct
- C.40.OCN - Construct a Bounded Opportunity
- C.40.OI - Bound an Opportunity Inquiry
- C.40.OC - Characterize a Subject for a Possible Change
- C.40.NU - Search Neighboring Uses and Means
- C.40.PC - Construct a Worthwhile Problem and Proposed Contribution
- C.40.DC - Construct Directions with Support Configurations
- C.40.JF - Qualify Dependencies and Joint Reachability
- C.40.OP - Maintain Opportunities and Stepping Stones
- C.40.RQ - Requalify Changed Opportunities
- C.40.OD - Construct and Continue Open-Ended Development
- C.40.JD - Develop a Way, Its Holder and Its Provision Together
- C.40.NP - Continue from a Result to New Attainable Problems
- C.41 - Select Checklist Questions for a Work Result
- C.41.TF - Construct a Checklist Template That Preserves Its Questions
- C.41.OF - Fit a Checklist to Its Occasion of Use
- C.41.UA - Use a Checklist to Answer Questions and Act on the Results
- C.41.SR - Reconcile Checklist Results Across Shared Work
- C.41.QC - Qualify Checklist Criteria and Checking Means
- C.36.P - Clarify Cultural-Evolution Wording for a Claim or Action
- C.36.RP - Sustain and Renew Shared Ways of Working
- C.36.MC - Qualify and Develop a Method Culture
Part E - The FPF Constitution and Authoring Guides
- E.1 - Vision & Mission
- E.2 - FPF’s Eleven Pillars and Bitter-Lesson Preference (BLP)
- E.2.DA - Evaluate How FPF Realizes Its Pillars (Pillar-Adequacy CharacteristicSpace)
- E.3 - Principle Taxonomy, Precedence and Agent Autonomy Profiles (ABL)
- E.4 - FPF Ecosystem Architecture: Framework Families, Products and DPF Suites
- E.4.CM - Develop Connected Methods as Framework Contributions
- E.4.FPF - FPF Edition Assembly: Publication Forms, Carriers and Access Routes
- E.4.PFAD - Principle-Framework Architecture Decision
- E.4.DPF - Domain and Local Principle Frameworks: Whether and How to Author and Publish
- E.4.DPF.DA - Evaluate a DPF or LPF Package for Its Declared Use (Package-Adequacy CharacteristicSpace)
- E.4.PFR - Pattern-Framework Relation and Edition Discipline
- E.4.PFIP - Principle-Framework Publication Integration and Preservation
- E.5 - Four Guard‑Rails of FPF
- E.5.1 - DevOps Lexical Firewall
- E.5.2 - Notational Independence
- E.5.3 - Unidirectional Dependency between FPF Families
- E.5.4 - Cross‑Disciplinary Bias Audit
- E.6 - Didactic Architecture of the FPF Specification
- E.7 - Archetypal Grounding: Explain Rules of FPF Architectural Patterns through Cases
- E.8 - FPF Authoring Conventions & Style Guide
- E.8.ML - Construct a Pattern Language for Connected Methods
- E.8.ECSPF - Author an FPF Pattern from an Accepted Evaluation CharacteristicSpace Specification
- E.9 - Design-Rationale Record (DRR) for FPF Content Decisions
- E.9.DA - Evaluate a DRR for Its Declared Authoring Use (Decision-Adequacy CharacteristicSpace)
- E.10 - Unified Lexical Rules for FPF
- E.10.LRN - Recovering What “Learning” Means in the Current Claim
- E.10.INT - Recovering What Interest or Curiosity Means Here
- E.10.DEV - Recovering What Development or Evolution Means in the Current Claim
- E.10.MOVE - Move, Readiness and Trajectory Wording Precision Restoration
- E.10.ARCH - Wording-Use Ontological Precision Restoration Architecture
- E.10.ROLE - Recovering What “Role” Means in the Current Claim
- E.10.P - Conceptual Prefixes policy & registry
- E.10.D1 - Recovering What “Context” Means in Use
- E.10.D2 - EntityOfConcern, Description Episteme, and Specification-Use Discipline
- E.11 - First-Practical Entry and Pattern-Use Discoverability Discipline
- E.11.PUA - Pattern Use in a Working Situation and First Useful Result
- E.11.PUR - Pattern-Use Applicability, Recommendation, and Coordination
- E.11.PFP - Framework Publication Form Profile for Markdown
- E.11.DSG - Architectural Reference
- E.12 - Didactic Primacy & Cognitive Ergonomics
- E.13 - Pragmatic Utility and Proxy-to-Value Alignment
- E.14 - Human-Centric Working-Model: Readable Claims and Recoverable Assurance
- E.15 - Pattern Change, Edition Continuity, and Impact Analysis
- E.16 - RoC‑Autonomy Budget & Enforcement
- E.17.0 - Viewpoint and View Recognition for Multi-View Describing
- E.17.1 - Viewpoint Bundle Library - Reusable Viewpoint Reference Bundles
- E.17.2 - TEVB - Project-local Typical Engineering Viewpoint Bundle Template for Holons
- E.17 - Multi‑View Publication Kit
- E.17.EFP - ExplanationFaithfulnessProfile — explanation-use discipline over existing MVPK faces
- E.17.ID.CR - Compare Sources Within a Shared Review Frame (ComparativeReviewUnit)
- E.17.AUD - PublicationUnit Stability Discipline - keep one publication unit stable enough to read honestly
- E.17.AUD.LHR - PublicationUnit Stability Discipline and Local Head Restoration - repair the overloaded local lexical head before the publication unit inherits it
- E.17.AUD.OOTD - PublicationUnit Stability Discipline and PublicationUnit Primary-Subject Discipline - publication-unit stability over one primary subject
- E.18 - Transformation Flow Structure
- E.18.1 - P2W Problem-to-Work Carry-Through
- E.18.2 - Transformation Flow Mathematical Description
- E.18.3 - Constraint-Governed Transformation-Flow Unfolding Structure
- E.18.NET - Network of Transformation-Flow Structures
- E.19 - Pattern Quality Gates: Review and Refresh Profiles
- E.20 - Mechanism Introduction Protocol: Introduce or Revise FPF Mechanisms
- E.21 - FPF Pattern-Quality Evaluation CharacteristicSpace
- E.22 - Improvement-Oriented Quality Evaluation Question Framing
- E.23 - Quality Improvement Loop Method
- E.23.CDI - Developing Capability for a Named Work Family
- E.23.CAE - Capability Access and Expression Differential Probe
- E.24 - U.Ontic and Ontic Introduction Discipline
- E.24.CD - Ontic Candidate Detection and First-Use Disposition
- E.24.PUB - Episteme Publication: Availability, Form and Carrier
- E.24.UK - U-kind Admission and Ontic Settlement
Part F - The Unification Suite (U-Suite): Concept Sets, SenseCells, and System-Role Kinds and Assignments
- F.0.1 - Source-Local Meaning Recovery
- F.0.2 - Semantic Synthesis across Source Ontologies
- F.0.2.MA - Synthesize and Allocate Method Contributions
- F.0.2.RC - Test Constructive Coverage and Refresh Dependent Explanations
- F.1 - Find and Select Sources for a Current Question
- F.2 — Source-Local Term Harvesting & Normalisation
- F.3 - Source-Local Sense Clustering
- F.4 - SystemRoleKindDescription — Describing an Exact System-Role Kind
- F.5 - Name U-kinds, Local System-Role Kinds and SystemRoleKindDescriptions
- F.6 - SystemRoleAssignment and Performed-Work Attribution Check
- F.7 - Display Source-Local Comparisons in a Concept-Set Table
- F.8 - Mint-or-Reuse Decision for a Name
- F.9 - Relate Local Meanings across Contexts (Alignment and Bridge)
- F.9.1 - Bridge Stance Note — Clarify a Bounded Use
- F.10 - Apply and Interpret Evidence, Standard and Requirement Statuses
- F.11 - Distinguish Method, MethodDescription, Work and Outputs
- F.12 — Evaluate Promise Fulfilment from Work Evidence (Service Acceptance)
- F.13 - Lexical Continuity & Deprecation
- F.14 - Anti-Explosion Control for System-Role and Status Name Families
- F.15 - Static and Regression Conformance Harness for Naming and Semantic Unification
- F.16 - Worked-Example Template (Cross-Domain)
- F.17 - Make a Settled Naming Decision Recoverable for Reuse (Unified Term Sheet)
- F.18 - Local-First Unification Naming Protocol
- F.19 - Ontology-First Plain Technical Rewriting
Part G - Discipline SoTA Patterns Kit
- G.Core - Discipline SoTA Kit Invariants, Defaults and Refresh Triggers (Part G)
- G.0 - Define Admissible Comparison and Aggregation for a Frame (CG-Spec)
- G.1 - Author a Reusable CG-Frame Generator and Selector Kit
- G.2 - Harvest and Synthesize SoTA for a CG-Frame
- G.3 - CHR Authoring for a CG‑Frame: Characteristics, Scales, Levels, Coordinates
- G.4 - CAL Authoring for a CG-Frame: Operators, Acceptance Clauses, Evidence Wiring
- G.5 - Method-Family Registry, Dispatch and Selected-Set Result Declaration
- G.6 - Evidence Graph and Provenance Ledger: Citable Evidence-Provenance Paths
- G.7 - Cross‑Tradition Bridge Calibration Kit (BridgeMatrix → BridgeCards + BCT/Sentinels)
- G.8 - Package Method-Family Admissibility Rules and Maturity Ladders (SoS-LOG)
- G.9 — Parity and Benchmark Harness
- G.10 - SoTA Pack Shipping
- G.11 - Decide Whether and How to Refresh SoTA Packs and Related Results (Telemetry and Decay)
- G.12 — DHC Dashboards (Discipline-Health Time Series and Views)
- G.13 - External Interop Hooks for SoTA Discipline Packs (conceptual)
- Part H - Reserved