RMP.1:4.3.2 - Compare alternatives when their difference matters

Use this branch when existing sources offer materially different answers, or when the receiver needs the best-known current answer. Begin with the working question and the criteria that matter for its use.

Select sources by their answer-changing roles in F.1. When the result claims a best-known current answer, apply the stricter source comparison in F.1:4.2.1 and E.8:11, including serious alternatives, relevant failure evidence and application effort. A recent publication or a history of adoption can help identify a source without establishing that preference.

For each proposed answer, recover its assumptions, conditions and support. When an approach claims an improvement over earlier work, compare the limitation it repairs with those it retains. Consult the earlier source when that comparison needs it; keep historical influence distinct from evidence that the present answer works. State a trade-off when the answers improve different characteristics. The comparison may finish by identifying a question whose answer would distinguish the alternatives.

Say what this comparison changes: the answer, its applicability, the remaining research question or the useful stop. If establishing a new conclusion from a body of research requires appraisal and synthesis, use RMP.7 with its needed question and design. F.0.2 applies when the actual work is conceptual synthesis for a framework-authoring decision. A broader G.2 pack is useful when its declared CG-Frame and repeated-refresh use is needed. These are conditional continuations; a sufficient comparison can finish here.