PSDA.Reference:2 - How the constructions connect

PSDA.1 develops materially different formulations. Their differences identify evidence needs, intervention mechanisms and consequences a single opening story can hide. PSDA.2 selects and reopens a usable boundary. PSDA.3 constructs complementary models whose claims and omissions fit the question. A model can expose a boundary error, and a changed formulation can make an earlier model unnecessary.

PSDA.4 selects the problem-structuring and analytical Methods that supply the missing contributions. It compares a familiar adequate Method with a combination and qualifies the meaning and conditions of the joins. Combination costs preparation and interpretation; a list of respected techniques supplies no whole Method. Professional participation and facilitation remain direct PSDA.12, PSDA.13 contributions where they are needed.

PSDA.5 constructs a live alternative set. PSDA.6 represents values without inferring weights from the frequency of concerns. When the known menu misses a desired consequence, PSDA.6:4.2 distinguishes ends from proposed means, and PSDA.8:4.2.1 can construct a new means combination backward from the desired conditions and test it forward before returning it to PSDA.5. PSDA.7 connects uncertainty to a claim that could change. PSDA.8 compares consequences under the declared rule, and PSDA.9 examines justified variations and reversals. Their results feed back: a robustness gap can require one missing observation; an omitted consequence can reopen the model or alternative without restarting everything.

B.5.SD makes the connection between supplied claims and the receiving answer itself a working object. This Core Method can use the relevant formulation, model, analytical or professional contribution when it is missing. A source-supported explanation, a proposed experiment and a recommendation have different completion conditions. Construct and examine the inference using the relevant subject Methods and grounds.

These are result dependencies and conditional uses, not eighteen compulsory phases. Pattern numbers identify full Methods. The same occasion may enact several Methods, but a claim that they form one composite Method needs explicit whole action, parts, joins and permitted variation under PSDA.4 and FPF B.1.5.

In a professional engagement, formulation and model construction can change which question is worth answering, whose consequences are considered, what counts as the problem and which interventions become plausible. Decision support uses suitably qualified formulations, alternatives, value accounts and evidence to help a receiving decision. A problem formulation can be a complete useful return before a recommendation is possible; a well-formed question can also enter comparison directly.

PSDA.11 establishes the receiving use when that use is unclear. PSDA.12 supplies attributed concerns and participation limits, while PSDA.1 shows how rival formulations change evidence needs, boundaries and possible responses. PSDA.2 uses the needed engagement and participation results directly, alongside the formulations, to choose a usable inquiry boundary. A formulation alone cannot establish who receives the result or whether an affected person’s concern has been represented adequately.

Within that boundary, a model can answer one question and expose another. PSDA.3 makes the contributions and limits of complementary models usable. PSDA.4 compares the ways of obtaining the needed results and qualifies any combination. PSDA.13 helps participants examine the developing meanings and return shared and contested claims. A corrected concern can therefore change a model or reopen the boundary while independent analysis continues. PSDA.17 becomes useful when the actual interaction between these activities threatens their results.

Formulations and models inform the alternative construction in PSDA.5. A consequential difference may then need a value account from PSDA.6, an uncertainty account from PSDA.7, a consequence comparison from PSDA.8, or the conditions under which a comparison holds or reverses from PSDA.9. Obtain only the result that is missing. For example, a sensitivity result can expose a missing road-access premise without requiring another round of alternative generation. A new service concern that the option set cannot address gives a reason to revisit that set or its formulation.

PSDA.14 connects the qualified inputs to what the recipient can use now: a direction, a retained set, a conditional comparison, a probe, a request or an abstention with its reason. PSDA.15 connects a material later observation to the advice it can change when follow-up is needed. Neither relation requires performing all preceding patterns. The full flood-pump application shows the connections, including a useful first engagement question and a later whole-investment blocker.

PSDA.Reference:2.1 - Do we need a model, an explanation, research or advice?

Identify what the recipient lacks. These contributions can be used together, but their completion conditions differ.

A simulation produces a result under a model and its inputs. Establish the model’s applicability before relying on that result for the present subject. Conversely, research may produce a defensible model or explanation as its useful result; its worth need not depend on an immediate commercial decision. Routine measurement, restoration of a service and acceptance against an established criterion can finish in their own practices without becoming research.

Use a sufficient existing contribution and stop this selection. If two kinds of work are needed, state what one must return to the other.