STR.6:4.4 - Retain diversity for a stated future use

When a useful next possibility requires developing material, begin with something that can actually be changed: for example an editable design, a working operation with its inputs, or a retained intermediate result. Recover the conditions and permitted use needed for that change. An already selected contribution guides the examination; an unsettled receiving contribution does not prevent a bounded exploration of the material. FPF C.40, Develop Branching Search from Reusable Material, supplies this material-development Method across domains.

1. Choose a feasible variation, recombination or different use and apply the relevant professional operation. State what it changes and what can be examined. If that operation is unknown, return to the bounded obtaining question in section 4.2; a proposed variation is not its performed result.
2. Examine the resulting difference against the question and protected conditions. Keep intended properties separate from observed ones. A useful unexpected difference can support another continuation even when the variant is worse for today’s comparison.
3. Preserve the actual reusable material and the settings, inputs or explanation needed for the justified next use. Include a failed or mixed result when it changes the next question. Preserve the original material when comparison or recovery needs it.
4. Compare further work, inexpensive retention and stopping against the full burden and displaced work. Keep only the continuations that warrant that burden; there is no obligation to test every variant.

The first result is an examined variation and a usable continuation, or a justified stop. If the variation suggests a different receiving problem, return that question to STR.5 or the needed DOCA.3 inquiry. Until the contribution is qualified, the retained material is not yet a complete option family. Use section 4.5 when constructing problems and trying ways across them are both needed. An adequate existing way can be reused without entering either search.

Keep a possibility when its difference can matter to a plausible later choice, reveal a useful new region of the search or support another attainable option. State that reason and the conditions under which it expires. A stepping stone is a possibility retained because it may enable a later contribution; it need not be today’s best option.

Distinguish three questions before using an archive or front claim. What is worth retaining for exploration? Which candidates are currently non-dominated under a stated comparison? What should the chooser select? FPF C.18 governs the archive and front records when those claims matter; C.17 supports a claimed difference; C.11 governs local choice. A front does not answer the other two questions.

For ordinary small-set work, explain the alternatives and retention reasons directly. Do not claim a formal archive, front or dominance result merely because the notes have several rows. Nor does a retained set become a jointly funded portfolio.

Stop carrying a possibility when its plausible continuation no longer warrants the full burden. STR.7 can compare retention with a worthwhile experiment, but retention alone does not demand a test.