Decision Design Principles Framework Sources and Edition Notes

PSDA.Sources:1 - Source arguments and refresh

Each full pattern preserves its adopted contribution, serious alternatives, trade-offs and source limitations in SoTA-Echoing. Those arguments govern reuse more precisely than a publication year or an author list. The PSM and decision-analysis studies supply their examined claims and settings; professional sources qualify their own relationships; constructed examples supply transparent demonstrations, not effect estimates.

Use a source result only for its actual subject, configuration and question. When a source or condition changes, recover which inference depended on it, preserve independent grounds and obtain the smallest further result that can change the answer. FPF A.10 qualifies a known reliance; A.10.1 revalidates affected uses when a changed source requires their discovery; G.11 governs the selected currentness question. Actual scientific, legal, engineering and professional conclusions remain with their practices.

Each pattern’s SoTA-Echoing section owns its substantive comparison: the working question, selected move, serious rival, trade-off, source limits and observation that would reopen it. Use that argument before relying on a citation. The following map is a return aid, not a second source doctrine, a field census or independent confirmation of the sources it condenses.

Source-informed contribution	Source line used and substantive limit	Return when the answer changes
Engagement, participation and revisable framing	Smith and Shaw’s 2019 PSM characterization and Kogetsidis’s 2025 application review inform the continuing diverse PSM branch. Kelly and Gero 2022, Litster and colleagues 2024, and Nickel and colleagues 2024 inform non-equivalent frames and contextual revision. The bounded reviews and studies supply no universal ontology, representation guarantee or superior protocol.	PSDA.11, PSDA.12, PSDA.1 and PSDA.2: change the affected receiving-use, participation, formulation or boundary claim.
Model, Method and facilitation joins	Marttunen, Lienert and Belton 2017 provide the older critical PSM–MCDA combination anchor; Lami and Tavella 2019 supply an exploratory workshop contrast. Schwarzburg and colleagues 2024 distinguish confidence-related factors from validation. Franco and Greiffenhagen 2018 and Zimmermann and Curran 2023 contribute situated interaction evidence, not guaranteed consensus or general transfer.	PSDA.3, PSDA.4 and PSDA.13: requalify the particular claim, Method contribution, join or attributed meaning.
Alternative construction, values and comparison	Borgonovo and colleagues’ 2026 decision-analysis synthesis and Greco, Słowiński and Wallenius’s 2025 MCDA synthesis inform selective analytical contributions and preference-model fit. Keeney 2012 is a historical generation ingredient; Marttunen and colleagues 2019 inform disciplined objective simplification. These sources do not supply the engagement’s values or warrant one total score.	PSDA.5, PSDA.6 and PSDA.8: revisit material alternatives, lost value distinctions or the actual comparison relation.
Uncertainty, adaptation and robustness	Lempert and colleagues 2024 connect low-confidence knowledge to decision-relevant inquiry. The 2019 DAPP account contributes pathway timing and failure conditions; the 2026 decision-analysis synthesis informs sensitivity and information acquisition. Scenario membership establishes no probability, and a formal method supplies no local threshold or authority.	PSDA.7 and PSDA.9: narrow the stated range, reopen a reversal or qualify a feasible information question.
Professional recommendation and development-direction use	PSDA.14 uses NCDA 2024 within its profession and selected ICMCI v4.0 engagement clauses as a bounded older comparator. The profile’s separate source account qualifies the used portions on 2 September 2026, including the ICMCI AI Code v1.0 of May 2026 for AI used by an adviser. That code is not AI-holder evaluation, and the older competence clauses are not represented as the complete latest standard.	PSDA.14 and the profile source-responsibility account: revisit the service or source condition on which the advice relied.
Opportunity construction before a settled result	Phillips’s 2025 practitioner synthesis informs selective future exploration; NCDG 2024 supplies a bounded human information/alternative contribution; historical value-focused generation is one ingredient. Their combination supports a prospective construction Method, not empirical proof that its opportunities are reachable or effective.	The opportunity Method (FPF C.40.OCN) and its source-responsibility account: revise the changed search, dependency, reachability or next-question claim.
Follow-up under expected and unexpected change	Lynch and colleagues 2025 contribute domain-specific reconsideration triggers; Manley and colleagues 2026 contribute a perspective on targeted and broader observation. Their natural-resource settings do not set every client’s monitoring mix, threshold or institutional response.	PSDA.15: reconsider the affected observation, interpretation, service obligation or recommendation use.
Professional Method development	PSM comparisons, Borgonovo and colleagues 2026 and Franco and colleagues’ 2021 behavioural-OR synthesis inform contribution-specific repertoire and evidence questions. Kogetsidis’s 2026 online review covers selected journals in 2010–2024; publication frequency is neither a practice census nor practical worth.	PSDA.16: change the specific offering, applicability or evidence claim, not the whole repertoire merely because a paper appeared.
Simultaneous inquiry	The older expert/facilitated contrast in Franco and Montibeller 2010, Franco and Nielsen’s 2018 workshops, Franco and colleagues 2021 and Cunico and colleagues 2024 support bounded comparisons of interaction and challenge arrangements. They do not make one staffing or participation design universally best.	PSDA.17: requalify the actual interaction and local test; use C.32.MWA only when several structures need a joint synthesis.
Cultural continuation	Yearworth’s 2024 chapter summaries inform a practice-facing account. Voltan and Kells 2026 remain a conceptual GenAI-assisted proposal requiring practical testing; Czaplicka, Baumann and Rahwan 2025 offer a simplified mediation model. Neither publication, generated output nor a modeled mechanism proves professional uptake or cultural effect.	PSDA.18: revise the population scope or the affected claim about receiving interpretation, mediation or continuation.

Publication years identify sources; they do not by themselves identify a qualification window or show that a claim is still reliable. Older anchors remain useful for the particular contribution named above, while later work can repair their limits. Currentness is bounded to the actual inspected claim and intended use. No table here guarantees continuous monitoring or validates a local case.

PSDA.Sources:2 - Citation and limits

For this working edition, cite Anatoly Levenchuk, Decision Design Principles Framework, 12 October 2026, the named PatternID and the actual publication used. This working text contains eighteen complete Methods and the explanations needed to select and combine their contributions. A pattern address identifies a contribution within that publication; its Markdown fragment follows the actual heading. A changed title or source requires checking its maintained return rather than assuming a title-independent URL.

Cite the title, PatternID and edition actually used, with a permanent link or stored copy when the exact wording matters:

Anatoly Levenchuk, with AI-assisted development and review.
Decision Design Principles Framework.
Working edition, 12 October 2026.
GitHub repository: https://github.com/ailev/FPF

For a particular pattern, add its PatternID and title, for example: PSDA.14 - Prepare and Return a Decision-Support Recommendation. Retain the release date, and include a permanent link or stored copy when the exact wording matters.

PSDA.Sources:3 - Source responsibility and references

The development-direction advising profile uses the following sources, including opportunity-construction premises supplied by Core, for the purposes shown. The cited portions were qualified on 2 September 2026. Apply each source within the stated limits and reconsider a consequential claim when its source or use changes.

Source and inspected portion	Selected role and affected content	Limit and local reopen
Keeney, Value-Focused Brainstorming, 2012, publisher abstract	Historical generation anchor: explicit values inform alternatives; individual generation can precede group anchoring. Opportunity Method §2.	Not a current-prevalence claim or general reachability theory. Reopen if a stronger generation line changes the inquiry’s useful action.
Phillips, Decision Analysis for Practitioners, 2025, “Requisite Decision Models,” “Decision Conferences and Workshops,” “Decision Models as Transitional Objects,” “Decision Analysis Technology”	Contemporary practitioner synthesis for purpose-dependent future exploration and selective use of analytical ingredients. Opportunity Method’s inquiry/choice separation and source-informed design.	Experience-based account, not validation of this cross-holder construction Method or every future outcome. Reopen on a material limitation of that use.
NCDG 2024, CD2/CD3	Human-branch alternatives, consequences and qualified current career information. Both human examples.	Does not supply intervention, transfer, organization or AI mechanisms. Reopen the human information-use claims when their source or receiving use changes.
NCDA Code of Ethics 2024, A.2, A.10 and E.2	Human career-service participation, assessment competence and referral/closure boundaries. Profile engagement and return.	Profession-specific conditions; applicability must be established. No efficacy, legal or AI-holder assessment conclusion follows. Reopen only affected service claims.
ICMCI competence framework v4.0, 2021, C.1.1–2, C.2.1 and E.3.5	Agreed consulting engagement content, client involvement and material conflict disclosure. Profile engagement/return.	A verified bounded baseline, not a claim that v4.0 is the latest framework. Reopen when an applicable later clause changes the used service condition.
ICMCI AI Code v1.0, May 2026, §§1.2, 2.2, 3.1–3.4, 5.1–5.4, 7	Adds a qualified current source for AI used by an adviser: professional responsibility, material-output checking, data restrictions and client disclosure.	Applies within its stated professional/adoption scope. Does not supply AI-holder evaluation or intervention evidence. Reopen the affected service use, not every holder claim.

The ICMCI June 2026 release announcement supports the AI Code’s publication context. Its professional clauses above come from the Code itself, not the announcement. The 2026 competence-framework update presentation is separately discoverable; the present account makes no claim to have inspected or replaced the entire revised certification framework. The older selected engagement clauses are not represented as a complete current standard.

The subject-specific supplier account explains which result each practice supplies. The source-change and case-change account distinguishes the consequences of a changed source from those of a changed subject or service condition.

PSDA.Sources:4 - Source access for the development applications

PSDA.Sources:4.1 - Learning Product source access

The following sources belong to the Learning Product Development LPF. Their complete texts are not included here, and this publication supplies no verified public retrieval address for them.

Exact source	Contribution used in APP-PSD-04
LG.02 - Проектировать длинный учебный маршрут по устойчивым адресам	Place the first distinction, worked use and later varied return along a learning route with stable addresses.
LG.03 - Проверять законченный фрагмент руководства по следующему действию учащегося	Check whether a completed Guide fragment supports the learner’s next action and identify the bounded repair.
LG.05 - Проектировать учебную единицу, которая учит применять паттерн	Develop a pattern-centred unit around recognition, explanation, action, result/check, a worked case and practice.

Obtain the applicable source from the Learning Product maintainer when its full instruction is needed. LG.05 is marked Candidate in its source LPF; qualify its applicable use before treating it as established instructional guidance. The constructed application explains the requested design contribution, not the admission of that source. Without the full source or a qualified design result, retain the Guide-design question with Learning Product practice. The opportunity and programme results remain separately usable within their conditions.

PSDA.Sources:4.2 - Foundations programme source access

ThinkingFoundations + EngineeringFoundations is the programme source; Основания выбора и сравнение программ is its supporting programme-choice and comparison account, with a source-inspection basis of 2 September 2026. They illustrate a programme design considered before a particular person’s development question. Their full working texts are not included here and no verified public retrieval route is supplied.

For that illustration’s complete design and comparison, request both sources from the programme’s responsible designer or maintainer. For an actual person’s programme question, obtain the compatible HCD.2 comparison and the person’s relevant starting conditions, later tasks, support and participation. The illustration supplies none of those individual premises. A different adequate programme comparison can enter the same advice or choice question directly.

PSDA.Sources:4.3 - Predecessor source-account access

Development-direction profile: source responsibility and local refresh is the full predecessor source account, whose identified qualification window is 2 September 2026. The public PSDA section Source responsibility and references supplies a condensed source-responsibility expression, not that complete earlier account.

Use the public section for the contribution it actually states. If a historical qualification or source-use decision depends on omitted detail, obtain the full named account from PSDA profile maintenance. The source roles above and the supplying Core patterns retain their own bounded reliance; neither a condensed expression nor the source’s date supplies an uninspected stronger claim.

PSDA.Sources:4.4 - A useful stop when access is incomplete

A reader should be able to locate the current question, recover its first useful result or gap, and identify the source or practice that can support the stronger claim. If source access fails, keep the missing premise explicit and preserve independent qualified work. The responsible practice may supply an adequate alternative result, a narrower claim or a blocker. Publication, accessible text, recent dates and well-written examples do not supply the client’s evidence or authorization.

PSDA.Sources:5 - Source grounds for the development applications and their suppliers

These source contributions qualify their stated ingredients and uses. The general opportunity and continuing-development Methods have their own Core bodies; the professional advice and applications here retain the source limits on which they rely.

PSDA.Sources:5.1 - Opportunity, characterization, and retained possibilities

Source and relied-on contribution	Use in this framework	Limit and smallest reopen
ISO 56007:2023: opportunity/idea and concept work before solution development and deployment.	Adapted in C.40.OI, C.40.NU, C.40.PC, C.40.DC: independent early inquiry, contrastive search, receiving problem/contribution and prospective support configuration.	Reliance is on its public scope, not an inspected full paid standard or effectiveness evidence. Reopen the affected front-end boundary if that scope or a stronger practice changes it.
Phillips, Decision Analysis for Practitioners, 2025: requisite modelling, revisable problem framing and exploration sufficient to move forward.	Adopted and compared in C.40.OI: a strong alternative when joint modelling and sensitivity analysis serve the question; adapted to a bounded development inquiry with an optional no-adviser entry.	A practitioner account with cases, not comparative effectiveness evidence for these opportunity Methods. Reopen the bounded-entry choice when direct modelling already supplies the needed result.
Keeney, Value-Focused Brainstorming: generate alternatives from explicit values and avoid early group anchoring.	Adapted historical anchor in C.40.NU, joined to current bounded inquiry and source-qualified return.	This earlier contribution is not labelled the whole current SoTA or a universal generation Method. A better contrastive approach reopens the affected search move.
ISO 56008:2024: measurement and review for innovation management.	Bounded comparator for organization/campaign characterization in C.40.OC.	Organization scope does not supply person, AI or facility measures. Reopen its affected measurement comparison, not every holder branch.
Current FPF FPF E.10.DEV, FPF C.16, FPF C.11.CRC, FPF C.11.DUA, FPF A.15.9, FPF C.18 and FPF C.19.	Their directly defined semantic recovery, measurement, finite comparison, inquiry appraisal, external-result use and acquisition, archive/front and live-pool contributions are adopted or adapted at the body loci named in each pattern’s SoTA account.	None establishes a particular holder result. C.19 governs actual live-pool treatment, including under unchanged policy; it is not a local probe selector. A changed definition reopens the dependent opportunity claim.
OECD, Proactive portfolio management in mission-oriented innovation policy, 2025, sections 2–4: complementary activities, stage dependencies, resources, adaptation and termination.	Adapted in C.40.OP’s retention, stage-specific comparison and reconsideration.	Its mission selection and funding remain external; it supplies no universal horizon count, individual development mechanism or demonstrated option valuation. Reopen the particular retention or specialist-valuation question.

PSDA.Sources:5.2 - Professional and AI-source qualification

Source and qualified reading	Receiving contribution	Scope limit and return
NCDA Code of Ethics, 2024, A.2, A.10 and E.2.	Adapted in PSDA.19’s career-service participation, assessment-competence, information-use and referral boundaries.	The identified professional scope does not establish local law or the adviser’s actual competence. Determine the applicable service and local requirements before relying on those claims. A changed code or use reopens the affected condition.
ICMCI competence framework v4.0, approved October 2021, identified C.1/C.2 engagement and E.3.5 impartiality clauses.	Bounded clause reliance for client involvement and material conflict treatment in PSDA.19.	The official ICD 2026 page lists an update presentation. Its existence does not make this older framework the complete current standard or establish that the full update was inspected. A complete current certification claim remains outside this reliance.
ICMCI Code of Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence, v1.0, May 2026, sections 1.2, 2.2, 3.1–3.4, 5 and 7.	Adopted within professional scope in PSDA.19: responsibility, human content review, protected information, competence and material-use disclosure.	Routine tool availability is not warrant. Actual adoption, contract and applicable requirements determine the service conditions. The code does not evaluate an AI development subject.
NIST AI RMF Playbook, MAP 1.1 and MAP 4.1: receiving context, assumptions, third-party components and support risks.	Adapted in C.40.JF and C.40.RQ for configuration-specific joint premises and changed-use effects.	These Map contributions do not provide the client’s evaluation, causal result or permission. The source describes RMF revision in progress; this is not reliance on a claimed completed replacement edition. Reopen the affected configuration or source claim.

For a concrete currentness episode, suppose an adviser needs to know whether “ICMCI compliant” establishes all required engagement conditions. The identified v4.0 clauses support the bounded involvement/conflict contribution, and the May 2026 AI Code supplies a separate scoped AI-use contribution. Neither closes the broader complete-current-standard claim. The visible 2026 update cue returns that precise claim to the professional source owner; the adviser can retain the identified qualified contributions while withholding the broader assertion. Local legal and professional applicability still needs its own result. A newer label alone supplies none of these conclusions.

The Architectural Reference explains the connected language and the consequences of these sources for its use.