MDPE.18:3 - Solution

Build only the cultural-memory and lineage evidence that one decision needs. Preserve source identity, link every relied-on claim to a retrievable source passage or item, keep competing explanations when they can change the decision, and state what the records cannot establish.

MDPE.18:3.1 - Bound one decision

State:

• the practitioner or practice-developing Agent who will use the result;
• the decision: for example attribution, reconstruction, teaching content, changed-condition use, restoration, retirement, or next development;
• the musical or movement subject;
• the population, place, period, and receiving use; and
• the claim strength needed now.

For example: “The festival workshop team must decide which Tarraxo creator and teaching claims to attribute to named sources and which movement and partnering distinctions to trial; it does not need a complete global genealogy.”

This boundary prevents both unlimited research and careless inference. A broad subject such as “history of tango” is not yet a decision use.

MDPE.18:3.2 - Identify source objects and world-side subjects

For every relied-on source, ask:

• What object is this—a recording, testimony, MethodDescription, notation, event record, dataset, instrument, publication, or something else?
• Which world-side Agent, Work occurrence, Method, performance, artifact, event, or population does it concern?
• Who created or recorded it, for what purpose, audience, language, and conditions?
• Which part of the source is used?
• What access, consent, attribution, editing, preservation, or future-use conditions apply?

Do not infer a Method from one work record. When several grounded Work occurrences or heterogeneous sources may support a reusable Method, use A.3.1.MR; use ME.18 only when a larger specialist reconstruction programme is needed. Process mining can help when an event log has defensible event, case, activity, object, and correlation choices. A frequent path is neither a norm nor a Method by itself, and logs usually omit embodied and tacit Work.

MDPE.18:3.3 - Build the source-to-claim table

Use a compact table:

Separate observation from interpretation. Preserve the source’s position: practitioner self-description, participant testimony, institutional statement, scholarly analysis, platform record, archive metadata, or later reconstruction. Corroboration can strengthen a claim; repeated copying of one source cannot.

Source age and currentness depend on the claim. An old recording can be primary evidence for an old occurrence. An old teaching manual may be historical evidence but poor guidance for current safety, preservation technology, or SoTA Method. When current practice or effectiveness matters, seek current enactment and direct practitioner evidence rather than relying on official adoption or publication count.

State the epistemic status: observed, source-attributed, corroborated, disputed, plausible expert estimate, or unknown. Large prevalence measurements are rarely affordable; a bounded expert estimate can guide a reversible decision when its observations and uncertainty are stated.

MDPE.18:3.4 - Compare lineage alternatives by the traits that matter

Do not force one genealogy over every subject. Ask which lineage dimension changes the decision:

• musical or movement material;
• bodily or instrumental technique;
• Method or teaching line;
• event, venue, platform, or participation form;
• name, institutionalization, or publication line; or
• population transmission and continuation.

Keep two or more alternatives only when sources support them and the difference matters. Useful alternatives include derivation from one line, mixture of several lines, independent convergence, deliberate branching, revival from records, or ecological evocation under similar constraints. A neat tree is a representation choice; test whether the relations are actually tree-like before using it.

If sources support only one bounded attribution and no serious rival, do not invent a second history to look balanced. State the supported claim and the unresolved gaps.

MDPE.18:3.5 - Expose what records cannot carry

Check the practice gaps relevant to the decision:

• embodied or instrumental capability;
• pressure, weight, touch, effort, sensation, timing, articulation, or correction;
• partner, ensemble, audience, venue, or equipment relations;
• operative constraints and situation-responsive choices;
• teacher feedback and learning context;
• software, model, prompt, data, or control configuration; and
• present holders, access, transmission opportunities, recognition, selection, and reproduction.

A source need not fill every gap. Say which gap blocks the decision and which can be tested by representative Work. Use MDPE.17 to test receiving enactment and MDPE.19 to test current continuation. Do not make those results from records alone.

MDPE.18:3.6 - Return decision-usable evidence

Return only the information needed by the receiving decision. The following prompts can help:

decision, user, subject, population, place, period, receiving use:
source-to-claim rows:
supported lineage relations by dimension:
live alternatives and why they matter:
embodied, performative, technical, and present-use gaps:
allowed decision uses:
blocked inferences:
useful continuation or stop:
source-change and evidence-change reopen conditions:

The result may be small. One qualified attribution, one usable MethodDescription, and one unresolved embodied gap can be enough. Select further inquiry or representative Work only when its attainable contribution warrants its burden for the receiving decision. The practitioner uses this evidence when choosing, authorizing, teaching, transmitting, restoring, retiring, or continuing the practice through the applicable direct Methods.