ME.13:4.1 - Pattern-Use Unfolding

Name the decision, subject, and status. State whether the question concerns fit in one receiving situation, an applicability boundary, or transfer of one supported claim. Identify the A.3.1-admitted Method, or preserve the candidate account and name only separately admitted constituent Methods whose enactment is claimed.
Bound the source and receiving situation families. Record project purpose, development phase, technical or domain problem characteristics, performer population, holder capabilities, participating Systems, Agent-performed Work, direct relations, constraints, support conditions, qualification window, and the domain result relevant to the claim.
Recover source Work and evidence. Use ME.11 evidence only for actual Work whose performers, enacted admitted Method, temporal extent, containing System, conditions, deviations, burdens, adaptations, results, and evidence path are recoverable. A report can support the account but does not admit Work by citation.
Select a receiving or held-out situation that can discriminate. Select or seek one named condition change capable of defeating the claim: technical coupling, project phase, domain, performer or capability envelope, support relation, organizational condition, information availability, authority boundary, or another named condition. State why it matters. If minimality matters, name the alternatives, ordering criterion, and basis for treating one change as smaller or weaker; otherwise record concurrent changes and unknowns without ranking them.
Separate matched, changed, and unknown conditions. Do not call conditions controlled unless the basis supports it. Record concurrent changes and missing facts; use missing-comparability-basis when the comparison cannot distinguish the claimed boundary.
Recover receiving Work independently. Admit the receiving Work occurrence and every claimed enacted Method under their direct governors. Preserve WorkPlan, simulation, demonstration, report, training, and support tasks as separate results. If receiving Work did not occur, return missing-performed-work rather than a transfer claim.
Track adaptations and Method semantics. Record changes to operations, dependencies, roles, stops, representations, support, and local Work. Ask whether reusable Method semantics stayed within the admitted Method. If they changed, return variant-question[...] to ME.15 and evaluate the unchanged and changed branches separately.
Compare domain results and evidence reach. Compare the result relevant to the fit claim together with burdens, deviations, failures, and limitations needed to interpret it. Distinguish direct observation, report, association, contribution, and causality. Do not use immediate self-report as long-term transfer without the missing time evidence.
Classify the bounded result. Return fit-within[...], failure-within[...], applicable-if[...], transfer-supported-between[...], transfer-not-supported, missing-performed-work, missing-comparability-basis, or the named missing premise. Plain labels may be used, but the situation, claim, evidence, and window must remain inspectable.
Route a defeated claim by result kind. Return a failure directly only to the ME.3 situational requirement, ME.6 architecture decision, ME.7 construction result or admitted Method claim, or ME.15 applicability or variant entry that the evidence contradicts. When the evidence may contradict an ME.8 description, ME.9 Method representation profile row, or ME.10 support claim, return the bounded observation to ME.12; ME.12 identifies and rechecks the maintained correction owner, including the direct governor of any lower representation result. Do not reopen every carrier.
State non-transfer and reopen conditions. Name the populations, domains, capability envelopes, support arrangements, times, alternatives, and causal claims not covered. Reopen when one condition crosses the declared boundary, Method semantics change, evidence currentness expires, or a new unlike situation defeats the claim.