SYSE.10:4.1 - Perform the Move

1. Name the decision and claim. State the alternatives, deciding Agent, consequence, needed interval, and claim whose support can change the choice. Bind the claim to a subject, configuration, environment, use, interval, scale, and criterion.
2. Recover the current knowledge basis. Identify the relevant source epistemes and editions, including explanations, hypotheses, heuristics, models, mathematical lenses, observations, prior Work, and contradictory results. State their currentness and transfer limits. Evidence does not define the claim it supports.
3. State what each result can distinguish. Name the rival claims or alternatives, applicable conditions, inputs and controls, measurements, sensitivity, uncertainty, and the result that would leave the decision unchanged. If the live problem is choosing one further probe, use C.11; for an experiment set or sequence, use a specialist experimental-design Method.
4. Qualify model and representation use. State the modeled subject, purpose, assumptions, omissions, parameters, boundary conditions, solver or inference Method, verification, calibration, validation, uncertainty, sensitivity, and extrapolation boundary needed by this claim. Use C.29 for a mathematical correspondence and loss account.
5. Identify Work, observations, and measurements. Keep planned Work separate from dated Work. Name the performing Agent, enacted Method, tools, resources, subject configuration, inputs, controls, disturbances, result production, calibration, measurement interval, uncertainty, and missing data to the degree the claim needs.
6. Construct the evidence use. For each relied-on result, state the target claim, polarity, the actual grounding subject when one is part of the claim, source scheme, scope, relevance window, provenance, supported use, and unsupported use. Use C.28 separately when the claim is causal or counterfactual.
7. Compare and criticize. Seek possible defeaters such as shared assumptions, implementation-to-model gaps, configuration mismatch, rival explanations, contradictory or negative results, selection effects, failed transfer, extrapolation, and affected-System evidence omitted by the original study.
8. Record the assessment and decision effect. State what is supported, contradicted, narrowed, or unresolved; the reliance limit; residual uncertainty; and the stronger blocked claim. Then state the resulting engineering action—for example, choose, narrow, postpone, redesign, seek evidence, or stop. The assessment itself supplies neither the decision nor its authority.
9. Stop and reopen deliberately. State why the current basis is enough for this decision. Record a compatible C.11 result or specialist experimental-design result when further evidence is chosen. Name the later change that would matter, such as a change to a relied-on source, configuration, environment, use, Method, capability, observation, or claim.

This is an A.22.CGUS learning unfolding, not a lifecycle. Evidence-producing Work may overlap, iterate, or occur in another order. A physical trial can precede simulation during reverse engineering; operating evidence can reopen theory and architecture; a formal check and bench trial can address different claims concurrently.