RMP.5:4.1 - Recover the claim and one consequential connection
State what the answer would assert: about which phenomenon, cases, population, setting, period or corpus; which relation; and under which conditions. Distinguish a description, interpretation, comparison, causal explanation and prediction when their support differs. If the claim is emerging through analysis, say so.
Follow one connection that matters:
| Connection | What to recover |
|---|---|
| Material to observation or source claim | Which records, specimens, encounters, documents or computations are available, what they represent, and their selection, transformation, loss and access limits. |
| Observation or source to analysis | The applicable Method, units, assumptions, consequential choices and actual deviations; which choices preceded seeing the results. |
| Analysis to proposed answer | The reasoning that makes the result bear on the exact claim, including the comparison or interpretation and the scope it can support. |
Recover only the RMP.3 intentions and RMP.4 trace needed for this examination. A recorded plan supplies intentions; actual conduct requires its own evidence. A retrospective account remains retrospective. An inaccessible source, lost observation or unperformed comparison remains a limit.
If the supplied analysis already answers the same question under matching material, Method, assumptions and use, retain it. Recompute or extend only what a changed premise or a live criticism requires. A new filename or the age of an unchanged analysis is not, by itself, such a premise change.