ME.11:4.1 - Pattern-Use Unfolding

Name the later decisions and trial questions. Separate the questions that may feed ME.12 coherence, ME.13 situational fit or transfer, and ME.14 practical worth. Do not hide several conclusions inside “does the Method work?”.
Preserve the subject branch. Identify the admitted Method under A.3.1, or keep the proposed whole as a candidate account. In the candidate branch, state which candidate claims are being compared and which constituent Methods, if any, are separately admitted and may be enacted.
Select one representative situation. Name the intended-use characteristics that matter to the question: task purpose, development phase, technical or domain conditions, performer population, holder capabilities, participating Systems, direct relations, constraints, and qualification window. State why this situation covers the current question without claiming population representativeness.
Select a discriminating situation when the decision needs one. Change or seek one condition whose outcome can show whether a live claim holds in that situation: unfamiliar technical coupling, another domain, missing support relation, changed capability envelope, stale material, or another named alternative. State the claim that could fail. Do not require every trial to contain an artificial stress case.
Write the WorkPlan without backdating Work. State intended tasks, performers, admitted Methods, support conditions, observation points, protected conditions, burdens to record, stop rules, and the later use of each observation. Keep simulation and demonstration as planned or separately typed activities unless independently admitted Work occurs.
Check capability and support inputs separately. When reliance on capability changes interpretation, identify the holder System, Work family or result class, operating envelope, measures, qualification or currentness condition, and evidence. Recover only ME.10 material, access, tool, provider, feedback, and decision conditions supported for the relevant task rows; preserve retained candidates, split boundaries, untested conditions, and gaps rather than treating them as configured inputs.
Admit only Work that occurred. For each occurrence, recover every actual performer System and its A.13 basis, the action history, at least one admitted Method actually followed, temporal extent, and required containing-System relation under A.15.1. Add assignment attribution, System use, operation binding, affected referent, resource use, or result relations only when their own predicates obtain.
Record conditions and departures. For each Work occurrence, record the situation, relied-on Systems and direct relations, holder capabilities used in interpretation, deviations from the WorkPlan, adaptations, burdens, stops, domain results, and observations. Keep the domain result, report, log, and evidence-use relation separate from Work.
Qualify the evidence reach. Distinguish direct observation, participant report, source interpretation, observed association, contribution claim, and causal claim. Return the strongest supported level and name missing comparison, temporal, capability, relation, or alternative evidence.
Return evidence by later use. Send contradicted description or relation claims to ME.12, situation comparisons and an unlike-situation result to ME.13, and results, burdens, alternatives, side effects, and evidence limits to ME.14. Return missing-performed-work, missing-method-admission, missing-capability-basis, missing-direct-relation, or the named missing premise when a required condition is absent.