HCD.3:4 - Solution
Compare the coarsest decision-changing rival branches, run only safe and qualified observations, and return the smallest human limitation justified by the current evidence—or return the question to the owner of the surviving non-training branch.
HCD.3:4.1 - Bind the Diagnostic Use
Name:
- the exact human holder and participating basis;
- the HCD.1 demand account or equivalent qualified later-Work input, including configuration, conditions, horizon, and evidence window;
- the observed gap and the HCD decision it could change;
- the evidence collector, declared use, access conditions, privacy or worker-governance boundary, and direct owners;
- the protected conditions and safe probe limit; and
- the point at which a clinical, safety, legal, employment, target-domain, or other specialist owner must take over.
If the demand is absent or incompatible, stop with a non-training return for the exact missing scope or evidence. Do not diagnose a person against a job label, aggregate profile, or imagined future task.
HCD.3:4.2 - Compare Decision-Changing Rivals
Include at least the branches that remain plausible and would change the next Work:
| Rival branch | Question that keeps it live |
|---|---|
| demand or envelope | Is the demand specified correctly and inside the capability envelope being relied upon? |
| applicability, access, expression, adaptation, or enactment | Is the response unavailable, or does a cue, context, interference, configuration, or performer arrangement prevent selection or use? |
| Method or description | Is the target Method missing, stale, disputed, or inapplicable? |
| tools and supports | Are AI, information, cues, access, environment, workload, recovery, or another support condition limiting? |
| assignment and organization | Is assignment, permission, authority, coordination, organization, provider access, or a required specialist result missing? |
| specialist condition | Does health, disorder, safety, ethics, law, or another specialist condition require its direct owner? |
| human change target | Does the evidence support a particular capability, knowledge, skill, discrimination, misconception, behaviour, self-regulation, or commitment as limiting and changeable? |
| measurement artefact | Could a scoring, recording, or interpretation error explain the poor indicator without the corresponding failure in Work? |
Do not expand the set with every imaginable explanation. Include a branch when a credible current value or absence makes it decision-changing.
Too few or poorly linked observations, coupled conditions, contamination, or unsafe collection can prevent this comparison from distinguishing the live branches. Narrow the conclusion or give a non-training return that names the evidence limit, the next needed observation, and safe conditions for obtaining it.
Look for a missing intermediate performance, not just an absent basic skill or an unknown whole procedure. Use FPF B.1.5.EW to recover the relevant constituent–whole connections. In a stipulated dance case, the person has sufficient strength, holds the axis when stationary and recalls the figure, but loses balance during its rotation. Those observations locate a coordination question between the muscular actions and the figure; they do not establish a general lack of strength or memory. If existing observations already distinguish the decision-changing rivals, use them. Otherwise choose a suitable comparison of the rotation in isolation and in the figure, under domain-qualified conditions. Return the supported limitation or the unresolved alternative rather than prescribing more of whichever exercise is easiest to name.
HCD.3:4.3 - Probe Before Declaring Capability Loss
When a prior qualified capability or result exists and the differential can change the next Work, use an applicable E.23.CAE disposition before declaring loss or prescribing more practice. Return to a qualified reference condition without further development where safe, vary the smallest decision-bearing condition, and observe applicability, access, adaptation, enactment, and result separately.
A recovered response weakens simple global loss but does not prove transfer. Failure across reference and target conditions may warrant capability-claim revision only after demand, configuration, support, and measurement rivals have been addressed. If the probe teaches, primes, fatigues, changes exposure, or cannot be run safely, narrow the conclusion or return an unresolved differential that states the observation limit and its effect on the conclusion.
For any new observation, record the evidence collector, holder participation, declared use, protected conditions, access and privacy boundary, and whether another owner must interpret the result. Treat an assisting System’s inference as decision input. Acting on it requires separately established authority for the particular action.
HCD.3:4.4 - Record the Result
A qualified intervention target contains:
| Result position | Required content |
|---|---|
| use boundary | Human holder, later-Work demand, configuration, horizon, evidence window, receiving decision, participation basis, and governance limits. |
| observed gap | Claim-sized Work observation, intended result or critical-error boundary, and why the gap matters. |
| target | The person’s difficulty with the required contribution and the smallest supported human change to target under the named conditions. A later decision selects any practice or other intervention. |
| evidence | Observations, work products, contrasts, inference rule, uncertainty, and contamination or measurement limits. |
| rival disposition | The explanations considered, any still-plausible alternatives, and their effects on the target and next observation. When none remain, keep the evidence limits and reopen condition explicit. |
| protected conditions | Method, task, tools, prompts, information, time, environment, assignment, authority, supports, and specialist routes held or bounded. |
| intended observation | The target change to observe, its conditions, and the claim that would depend on it. Explaining a result as an effect of the intervention through that target requires evidence for each link. |
| boundaries and continuation | Direct specialist or owner boundary, unsupported uses, and the condition that reopens the target. |
Observed performance may be reported with its conditions before a causal explanation is established. A better score alone establishes neither a change in the proposed target nor the intervention’s effect through that target.
A non-training return contains:
| Result position | Required content |
|---|---|
| actual owner or missing result | The direct Method, tool, assignment, organization, authority, specialist, evidence, or other owner and the exact result or value needed. |
| blocked HCD decision | The diagnosis or later development decision that cannot be made. |
| evidence and rival disposition | What is known, what remains unresolved, and why a human target is not supported. |
| safe interim boundary | What must not be assigned, inferred, prescribed, or used meanwhile. |
| retry condition | The exact new result, protected observation, owner decision, or compatible evidence that permits reconsideration. |
HCD.3:4.5 - What Changes in Practice
A practitioner no longer asks, “Which training should fix this failure?” They ask, “Which live explanation would change the next Work, what observation distinguishes it safely, and what is the smallest human target the evidence actually supports?” A missing Method, prompt, authority, specialist result, or diagnostic observation is returned under its own name.