Public units
| Unit | Reader use |
|---|---|
| Systems Engineering Principles Framework Readme | Follow connected methods from an engineering difficulty to a usable result and its changed conditions. |
| Agent work and support | Choose and use an available way for the current task, or find the construction needed to repair recurring misallocation. |
| Citation | Cite this framework or one pattern with its author, title, release date, and publication address. |
| Preface | Understand how 52 patterns connect common Systems Engineering, Platform Engineering, selected software Methods and engineering of agent work and support. |
| Cross-Pattern Applications | Use two navigation walkthroughs and four worked applications in software, cyber-physical equipment and manufacturing. |
| Framework Boundary and Refresh | Check the publication’s scope and professional source coverage, trace claims back to their sources, and find remaining profile obligations and reopen conditions. |
Part I - Project Focus, Environment, Consequences, and Problem/System-Family Development
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SYSE.1 - Choose and Reopen the Project System-of-Interest | Keywords: project system-of-interest, intended System, project focus, product, solution, project boundary, outside effect. Queries: “Which System is this project actually changing or bringing about?” “Why is this the useful focus now, and what could reopen it?” Establish a shared project-system choice that lets later use, architecture, realization, and assurance decisions refer to the same subject. | FPF A.1.SCR, C.11 | |
| 2 | SYSE.16 - Recover the Systems and Conditions Needed for a Use Decision | Keywords: operational environment, suprasystem, using System, neighbours, interactions, operating conditions, context diagram. Queries: “Which surrounding Systems and conditions matter to this use decision?” “What containing, using, interacting, or boundary-crossing relations must the engineering account distinguish?” Recover the decision-relevant use context across its functional, constructive, interaction, and operating claims so the next concept or architecture choice has a grounded basis. | SYSE.1; FPF A.22 | |
| 3 | SYSE.17 - Find Systems That May Bear Engineering Consequences | Keywords: affected Systems, consequences, bystander, future operator, maintainer, ecological System, direct relation, possible path. Queries: “Who or what may undergo a consequence of this engineering change?” “Which supported relation or possible path makes that bearer relevant?” Discover and qualify consequence-bearing Systems while the project can still change its concept, constraint, alternative, probe, or stop decision. | SYSE.1, SYSE.16; FPF A.1.CSD, C.28, A.10 | |
| 4 | SYSE.2 - Develop Linked Use and System Concepts | Keywords: use concept, System concept, Concept of Operations, use case, scenario, user story, requirements, outside effect. Queries: “How will this System be used in a concrete situation?” “Which candidate System concept could support that use?” Link use claims to System-concept claims with their relevant neighbours, conditions, consequences, and uncertainty; expose the next architecture question or the missing use premise. | SYSE.1, SYSE.16, SYSE.17; FPF C.17 | |
| 5 | SYSE.22 - Coevolve Engineering Problems and System-Family Options | Keywords: problem formulation, System family, option generation, exploration, experiment, lineage, current alternatives. Queries: “How should the problem change when a prototype or operating observation reveals a new possibility?” “Which System-family options should remain under comparison now?” Develop problem formulations and possible System solutions together, preserving their lineage and returning new observations only to the choices they can change. | SYSE.1, SYSE.2, SYSE.6, SYSE.13; FPF C.11, C.17-C.19, G.11 |
Part II - Architecture, Descriptions, Offerings, and Professional Contributions
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | SYSE.5 - Develop an Engineered System’s Functional Organization and Bearer Alternatives | Keywords: function, functional organization, bearer, allocation, interface, operating mode, placement, redundancy. Queries: “Which different organizations could produce the required outside effect?” “How could Systems share or alternate the functional contributions?” Develop functional and constructive alternatives together with their proposed allocations, interfaces, integration dependencies, and evidence, giving the architecture decision materially different structures to compare. | SYSE.2, SYSE.16; FPF A.6.F, A.22 | |
| 7 | SYSE.6 - Decide and Reopen the Engineering Architecture | Keywords: architecture decision, functional allocation, module boundary, interface, control, redundancy, product family, trade-off. Queries: “Which engineering architecture should the project choose for this use?” “Which evidence or changed condition would reopen that choice?” Select the decision-relevant structures, compare materially different alternatives and accepted losses, and state the constraints that later realization and specialist decisions must respect. | SYSE.2, SYSE.5; FPF C.30, C.32 | |
| 8 | SYSE.7 - Keep Engineering Descriptions Usable Together for Decisions | Keywords: engineering descriptions, model, requirement, CAD, simulation, digital twin, configuration, correspondence, contradiction. Queries: “Which claims across our models and records support this decision?” “Do they concern compatible subjects, configurations, intervals, and interpretations?” Maintain a usable ensemble of descriptions with explicit links to sources and returned evidence, justified correspondences, and identified contradictions that can change the engineering answer. | SYSE.6; FPF C.29, A.10 | |
| 9 | SYSE.8 - Develop an Integrated Offering and Provider Concept for Using an Engineered Result | Keywords: integrated offering, provider concept, service, access, consumables, maintenance, support, financing, risk allocation. Queries: “What provider arrangement could fulfil this offering in its intended use?” “How do provider, access, and support choices change the technical concept and allocation of risk?” Develop the offering and provider concept alongside the System concept, naming the needed Systems, Work, promises, and supported contributions. | SYSE.2; FPF A.2.3 | |
| 10 | SYSE.9 - Use or Request Specialist Engineering Results | Keywords: specialist result, engineering contribution, receiving decision, safety, calculation, authority, evidence limits. Queries: “Which exact specialist answer could change this whole-System decision?” “What subject, configuration, conditions, and evidence must that answer address?” Use an adequate qualified specialist result or return its material limit. Select a new request only when its attainable contribution warrants the whole acquisition burden for the engineering choice; preserve the supplier Method and authority. | SYSE.2, SYSE.6; FPF A.15.9, C.11.DUA, A.6.REL, E.10.ROLE | |
| 11 | SYSE.10 - Assess Research, Model, and Trial Results for an Engineering Decision | Keywords: research result, engineering model, simulation, experiment, prototype, field trial, formal proof, validity. Queries: “What can this research, model, or trial result support in our engineering decision?” “Which implementation correspondence or untested condition limits that use?” Assess what the result supports, its remaining uncertainty, and any need for further observation, so the decision uses partial knowledge within its justified limits. | SYSE.6, SYSE.7; FPF A.10, C.16 |
Part III - Obtaining Engineering Results, Recursive Realization, Platforms, Independent Constituents, and Evolvability
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | SYSE.24 - Choose How the Project Will Obtain a Needed Engineering Result | Keywords: make or buy, reuse, supplier, outsourcing, provider, AI assistance, integration burden, migration, exit, platform obtaining, repair, retain, share, build or buy. Queries: “How can the project obtain the same needed engineering result in different ways?” “Which arrangement includes the real assurance, support, capability, and exit costs?” Construct comparable whole arrangements and return a bounded choice, retained alternatives, worthwhile probe, or the premise that prevents comparison. | SYSE.1, SYSE.2; FPF C.11, C.18 | |
| 13 | SYSE.3 - Plan the Next System-Realization Action (Recursive Realization Network) | Keywords: realization network, builder System, fabrication, adaptation, installation, qualification, build the builder, feasibility. Queries: “Which Systems and Work can realize the selected architecture?” “What is the first unsupported branch, including the means needed to build or change a builder?” Recover the bounded realization arrangement and select the next enabling action or the smallest earlier answer that infeasibility requires revisiting. | SYSE.6, SYSE.8; FPF E.18.NET, A.15 | |
| 14 | SYSE.11 - Integrate a System for One Bounded Use | Keywords: integration, bounded use, usable increment, installed interface, configuration, operating evidence, fallback. Queries: “Which actual configuration is usable for the intended purpose now?” “What still prevents locally completed parts or changes from working together?” Select one integration boundary, connect the contributing changes, observe the System in its resulting configuration during the named use, and return a configuration-specific result with evidence, limits, and fallback for the next decision. | SYSE.3, SYSE.12, SYSE.13, SYSE.18; FPF A.3.4 | |
| 15 | SYSE.12 - Develop or Retain an Engineering Platform for Practitioner Work | Keywords: engineering platform, practitioner Work, model repository, manufacturing cell, test bench, AI assistant, evidence store, support, platform development, readiness, later use. Queries: “What must enable the engineers’ actual modeling, building, testing, release, and observation Work?” “Which platform arrangement helps one Work family and obstructs another?” Choose whether to retain or change the enabling arrangement, and assess its contribution to practitioner tasks and the engineered result. | SYSE.15, SYSE.20; FPF A.2.2 | |
| 16 | SYSE.18 - Decide Whether and How to Integrate Systems Governed by Different Agents | Keywords: independent constituents, system of systems, interoperability, authority, interface, commitment, independent evolution, platform federation. Queries: “How can Systems governed by different Agents work together for this use?” “Which contribution or interface may change outside the integrating project’s control?” Choose the bounded coordination alternative, identifying who governs each constituent and with what authority, how it may evolve, its operating conditions, and the evidence available. Name any agreements or observations still needed. | SYSE.6; FPF E.18.NET | |
| 17 | SYSE.23 - Choose What to Change So Later System Changes Become Easier | Keywords: evolvability, future change, modularity, configurable family, builder platform, change lead time, test capability. Queries: “What should we change now so valuable later changes become easier?” “Is the limiting condition in the project System, its builders, the platform, or their joint arrangement?” Compare targeted changes against the stated future-change needs, dependencies, burden, and evidence for their expected contribution. | SYSE.22, SYSE.3, SYSE.6, SYSE.12, SYSE.20; FPF C.11, C.25, C.30, C.32 |
Part IV - Configuration, Continuing Change, and Source Continuity
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | SYSE.13 - Establish Configuration Identity, Variants, and Effectivity | Keywords: configuration identity, unit, variant, version, baseline, effectivity, installed state, bill of material. Queries: “Which actual or proposed configuration does this claim concern?” “For which units, conditions, and intervals does the evidence apply?” Establish the decision-relevant identities, differences, and effectivity links across engineering, manufacturing, operating, and maintenance descriptions, with evidence connecting records to the System. | SYSE.6; FPF A.22, C.2.1, C.27.TA | |
| 19 | SYSE.14 - Make a Release Decision for Named Engineering Work or Use | Keywords: engineering change, release, release for build, release to service, configuration, permission, evidence continuity. Queries: “What may be released for which named Work or use?” “Which changed claims and evidence support that exact release decision?” Distinguish the release subject and authority, carry configuration-specific evidence, and return the bounded decision, conditions, or unresolved premise to the intended receiver. | SYSE.13, SYSE.19; FPF C.11, A.10, B.3 | |
| 20 | SYSE.19 - Revalidate Engineering Decisions When a Relied-on Source Changes | Keywords: source change, supplier revision, standard, research correction, relied-on premise, impact analysis, revalidation. Queries: “Which engineering decisions relied on the claim that changed?” “Does the change affect current use, configuration, or release evidence?” Trace the changed source claims to actual reliance, preserve earlier source editions and decisions, and revalidate only the affected engineering answers and their dependent uses. | SYSE.7, SYSE.10; FPF C.2.1, A.10, G.11 |
Part V - Assurance, Method and Work Architecture, Repertoire, and Cultural Continuation
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | SYSE.4 - Decide Whether and How to Challenge an Engineering Claim | Keywords: engineering assurance, claim, challenge, test, measurement, inspection, evidence use, validity boundary. Queries: “Which challenge could change reliance on this engineering claim?” “What configuration, conditions, uncertainty, and time limit the returned evidence?” Reuse compatible evidence or select a challenge; qualify the evidence use and identify the earlier focus, concept, architecture, realization, or specialist answer that must be reassessed when reliance changes. | SYSE.10, SYSE.11, SYSE.14; FPF A.10, B.3 | |
| 22 | SYSE.15 - Choose and Refresh the Engineering Methods Needed by a Project | Keywords: engineering Method, repertoire, situation, application profile, variant, trial, qualification, refresh. Queries: “Which engineering Methods are needed to obtain this project’s results?” “What evidence would justify keeping, changing, or rejecting a Method variant?” Select and refresh the repertoire for the actual System and engineering situation, retaining specialist Methods and the distinction between engineering and the System’s operating Methods. | FPF A.3.2, C.36, E.23 | |
| 23 | SYSE.20 - Reconcile Overlapping Engineering Work and Required Order | Keywords: overlapping engineering Work, concurrency, required order, result dependency, Method structure, configuration, coordination. Queries: “Which modeling, implementation, trial, and review Work can overlap?” “Which result or released configuration really must exist before another use?” Reconcile the relevant Method, Work, System, representation, and support structures, returning the bounded choice, further inquiry, or unresolved question for the current engineering decision. | SYSE.15; FPF A.15.1, A.22.CGUS, E.18.NET | |
| 24 | SYSE.21 - Decide Whether and How to Change Systems Engineering Culture | Keywords: Systems Engineering culture, Method variant, practitioner population, transmission, retention, branching, intervention. Queries: “Should this engineering practice continue, change, branch, or stop across the relevant population?” “What evidence distinguishes visibility, local enactment, and wider continuation?” Recover the enacted Method variant and supported cultural relations for a bounded population and period; return the qualified current account or continuation choice, selecting further inquiry or intervention only when warranted. | SYSE.20; FPF C.36, G.11 |
Part VI - Platform Engineering: Supported Use and Continuing Change
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | SYSE.25 - Decide Whether and How to Improve a Platform from Practitioner-Task Evidence | Keywords: platform improvement, practitioner tasks, failed attempts, transferred burden, competing hypotheses. Queries: “Which platform difficulty should we address next?” “What observation could reject this proposed improvement?” Observe successful, failed and assisted task attempts for one user population, then compare improvement mechanisms and total user/provider burden. Return a bounded choice to retain or change provision, a discriminating probe or the specific missing premise; use SYSE.24 when complete obtaining arrangements compete. | SYSE.12; SYSE.24 for whole obtaining; SYSE.36 for software task measures | |
| 26 | SYSE.26 - Design a Supported Platform-Use Path | Keywords: supported use, request and result, variants, retry, cancellation, support. Queries: “What must the user supply to obtain a usable engineering result?” “What is safe after an interrupted request?” Design one supported interaction from its required inputs through waiting, completion and failure, with a capable support provider. Return a supported-use description with a trial or missing provision identified; distinguish description, actual operation and readiness to rely on it. | SYSE.12, SYSE.13; SYSE.8 if the provider concept is missing | |
| 27 | SYSE.27 - Evolve Platform Interfaces and Contribution Paths | Keywords: interface evolution, compatibility, units, defaults, physical connections, adapters, contribution, versioned change. Queries: “Does this change preserve the consumer’s promised result?” “How can a contributor test and maintain an extension?” Compare implementation change, extension, adapter, explicit break and refusal by their effects on the behavior consumers rely on. Return a bounded evolution decision with consumer effects, a way to test the contribution and the maintenance/support arrangement or gap; send required migration to SYSE.29. | SYSE.13, SYSE.26; OCE.4/OCE.6 when organizational results are missing | |
| 28 | SYSE.28 - Place Qualified Controls in a Supported Platform-Use Path | Keywords: control placement, evidence reach, subject identity, reuse, unavailable checker, authorized exception. Queries: “Where can this property change before it is relied on?” “What stops when the required check is unavailable?” For a supplied constraint, trace where the relevant property can change, then place verification or enforcement to protect the dependent action. Return the placement, outcome meanings, applicability and remaining gaps, preserving separate domain qualification and decision authority. | SYSE.4, SYSE.13, SYSE.26; SYSE.32 for artifacts; applicable control authority | |
| 29 | SYSE.29 - Decide Whether and How to Migrate or Retire a Supported Platform Path | Keywords: platform migration, retirement, retained state, infrequent consumers, coexistence, recovery. Queries: “Can users complete the required work through the receiving path?” “What must remain after the old interface stops serving?” Recover affected uses and obligations and compare transition choices. Exercise a selected increment with its failure branch. Return a bounded decision, its next increment when needed, or the exact missing premise, with remaining uses and obligations accounted for. | SYSE.13, SYSE.18, SYSE.27; SYSE.34 for software/data |
Part VII - Software Platform Engineering
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 | SYSE.30 - Make Software Builds Repeatable and Traceable | Keywords: software builds, resolved inputs, clean execution, byte reproducibility, timestamps, caches. Queries: “Which inputs produced the tested artifact?” “Can the specified package be reconstructed byte for byte?” Recover actual source, dependencies, instructions, toolchain and environment, then construct the specified output and, when needed, compare fresh executions under the declared reproducibility criterion. Return the procedure, input/output account and any required comparison result, or name the uncontrolled input or unexplained difference. | SYSE.13, SYSE.31, SYSE.33 for qualified inputs and conditions | |
| 31 | SYSE.31 - Keep Software Feedback and Continuous Integration Fast and Trustworthy | Keywords: software feedback, test meaning, flaky failures, quarantine, continuous integration, mainline. Queries: “Does this green check answer the current engineering question?” “Why do passing branches fail when combined?” Bind checks to the exercised artifact and conditions, preserve necessary slow or human evidence, and direct failures to their actual repairers. Return a usable feedback arrangement, or use the named DORA CI Method to obtain a checked shared-mainline revision for an already testable change awaiting integration. | SYSE.30, SYSE.33; exact DORA CI Method when integration is missing | |
| 32 | SYSE.32 - Promote Verified Artifacts without Rebuilding | Keywords: artifact promotion, artifact identity, provenance, consumer trust, destination configuration, verification. Queries: “Does the received package still carry the tested artifact’s evidence?” “What does a valid signature leave unestablished?” Preserve the selected artifact across transfer, separate destination configuration and apply the named SLSA verification Method with the consumer’s configured expectations when authenticity is required. Return an applicable promotion basis or a specific identity, evidence or trust gap; actual runtime deployment remains a separate result. | SYSE.13, SYSE.28, SYSE.30, SYSE.31; SLSA v1.2 verification | |
| 33 | SYSE.33 - Provide Reconstructible Software Development and Test Environments | Keywords: development environment, test environment, reconstruction, infrastructure as code, isolation, state reconciliation, cleanup. Queries: “Can another user reconstruct an environment that actually supports this task?” “What should happen after partial provisioning or a failed retry?” Specify required resources, data, access and operating conditions, then reconstruct and exercise the environment. The first result is an observed usable environment with its limits, or a reconstructible description with the precise missing resource, permission or data source. | SYSE.13, SYSE.26; SYSE.34 for persistent state | |
| 34 | SYSE.34 - Change Software and Persistent Data with a Recovery Boundary | Keywords: persistent data, schema migration, compatible coexistence, concurrent writes, backfill, idempotence, recovery, information loss. Queries: “Can old and new software safely use the same changing data?” “What remains recoverable after a partial or lossy migration?” Define the data contracts, writers and intermediate states; qualify the transition and recovery actions against concurrent updates and partial effects. The first result is a bounded change and recovery procedure with its operating limits, decision holder and unresolved conditions. | SYSE.13, SYSE.27, SYSE.33; engine-qualified change/recovery Methods | |
| 35 | SYSE.35 - Control Software Release Exposure with User-Relevant Signals | Keywords: release exposure, canary, representative tasks, control population, attribution, delayed outcomes, feature activation, recovery. Queries: “What evidence justifies widening use of a deployed candidate?” “When is a canary inconclusive rather than successful?” Select the population, task, observation interval and authorized exposure; compare outcomes while accounting for shared effects and state compatibility. The first result defines the comparison, decision conditions and qualified recovery action; observations then support a bounded proceed, stop or inconclusive result. | SYSE.34, SYSE.36, SYSE.41; SYSE.14 release authority | |
| 36 | SYSE.36 - Measure User Tasks and Set Software-Service Reliability Objectives | Keywords: user task, service level indicator, service level objective, SLI, SLO, eligibility, missing outcomes, error budget. Queries: “Does this measurement count successful user tasks or only healthy components?” “What denominator and objective should govern this service?” Define eligible attempts, timely correct results and observation gaps before choosing telemetry; when an SLO is needed, agree the objective and response policy with the relevant users, providers and decision holders. The first result is a task measurement definition and exercised instrumentation, or an exact measurement gap. | SYSE.4; subject owner, task meaning and suitable instrumentation | |
| 37 | SYSE.37 - Alert on Actionable Software-Service Reliability Risk | Keywords: actionable alert, error budget, burn rate, multiple windows, sparse traffic, missing data, response capacity. Queries: “Does this reliability signal require action soon enough to justify an alert?” “Will the alert reach someone able to respond?” Choose an alert rule for actionable task failure, budget risk or lost observation, deriving budget-risk rules from the matching task, objective and consumption. Test evaluation, delivery, acknowledgement and the permitted response together. The first result is an exercised alert rule with its response and blind spots, or a precise observation or response gap. | SYSE.36; SYSE.38 for response; actual responder authority | |
| 38 | SYSE.38 - Diagnose and Restore a Failed Software-Platform Task | Keywords: failed platform task, diagnosis, incident response, safe mitigation, partial effects, competing causes, restoration, specialist request. Queries: “Which stage of this user attempt failed, and what can restore useful work now?” “What observation would distinguish the remaining causes?” Establish actual impact and state, compare causes, and test a permitted mitigation without repeating unknown effects. The first result is a restored task or usable limited result, or a narrowed cause question naming the result needed from a specialist. | SYSE.26, SYSE.34, SYSE.36, SYSE.40, SYSE.41; OPS.3/OPS.4 when needed | |
| 39 | SYSE.39 - Decide Whether and How to Reduce the Total Burden of Repetitive Platform Work | Keywords: repetitive platform work, toil, automation, task simplification, transferred burden, maintenance, exceptions, horizon. Queries: “Will this change reduce total work or move it to users?” “When does automation repay its construction and operating cost?” Compare retaining the method, simplifying the task, removing its cause, improving the supported interaction and automation using user effort, provider effort, waiting and risk over a stated horizon. The first result is a justified choice about the recurring activity. For a selected intervention, state how total burden will be compared after use. | SYSE.25, SYSE.26, SYSE.36; SYSE.24 for whole obtaining | |
| 40 | SYSE.40 - Protect Software Platform Capacity and Isolate Failure | Keywords: platform capacity, workload classes, admission control, bounded queues, isolation, deadlines, retry budget, serialization, recovery capacity. Queries: “Which shared limit lets one workload delay or disable another?” “Can the platform recover while demand remains excessive?” Compare capacity and execution changes, then exercise admission, isolation, bounded waiting and retries across shared dependencies. The first result is a tested protection arrangement for a stated envelope, with observed admitted, delayed and refused work and recovery limits, or the conditions that remain unqualified. | SYSE.26, SYSE.33, SYSE.36; SYSE.34/SYSE.41 for stateful recovery | |
| 41 | SYSE.41 - Deploy a Verified Software Artifact with the Target Configuration and Handle Partial Failure | Keywords: verified artifact, deployment, effective configuration, runtime readback, dependency test, partial failure, unknown effects, recovery. Queries: “Did the intended software and configuration become usable on each target?” “What may be retried after an interrupted deployment?” Prepare, install, configure and test the candidate against observed target state; reconcile partial outcomes before continuing. The first result is an observed runtime configuration with its test, interval and limits, or a precise failed or unknown partial state; exposure and release remain separate. | SYSE.13, SYSE.32, SYSE.33, SYSE.34; SYSE.11/SYSE.35 as receivers |
Part VIII - Engineering Agent Work and Support
| § | ID & Title | Status | Keywords & Search Queries | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 42 | SYSE.42 - Use a Selected Tool and Apply Its Result | Candidate | Keywords: selected aid, input binding, calculator, invocation, uncertain effect, receiving use. Queries: “Did we apply the tool to the intended input?” “How does its result enter the task?” Bind, perform, qualify and use the selected contribution; recover uncertain effects under the actual interface. | C.38/C.11; A.15.7/.15.9; C.24; SYSE.26–28/.43/.46/.47/.52 |
| 43 | SYSE.43 - Maintain External Memory for Continuing Work | Candidate | Keywords: worksheet, episode, provenance, conditional index, retrieval, reorganization, retirement. Queries: “Which relation did the record lose?” “Should these episodes share a summary?” Construct recording and retrieval, qualify reorganization against contrary experience and verify the receiving continuation. | A.15.8; ME.10; SYSE.42/.46/.47/.48/.52 |
| 44 | SYSE.44 - Divide and Recombine Work across Agents | Stable | Keywords: participant brief, contribution, shared premise, dependency, integration, source error. Queries: “Does this division repay its handovers?” “Which return became stale?” Compare complete ways, prepare participant-specific material, reconcile returns and reopen affected dependencies. | A.15.9; C.38/C.11; SYSE.9/.18/.20/.46/.47 |
| 45 | SYSE.45 - Train an LLM Policy from Qualified Interaction Experience | Candidate | Keywords: policy training, adapters, demonstrations, feedback, distillation, retained support. Queries: “Which stable contribution should the policy learn?” “What must remain externally available?” Qualify experience, choose the matching learning mechanism and compare the actual later configuration against the unchanged baseline. | CMP.7; E.23.CDI; SYSE.49/.46; SYSE.47 for a fixed-model alternative |
| 46 | SYSE.46 - Test an Agent and Its Support in Representative Work | Candidate | Keywords: performing arrangement, matched support regimes, selection, result use, restraint, burden, persistence. Queries: “Does support help, and does the agent choose it well?” “What changed in the whole task?” Obtain bounded evidence with input, action, return and use distinguished; test delay or shift for the reliance claimed. | SYSE.10/.4/.33/.49; A.15.8; E.23.CAE; HCD.12/.13 |
| 47 | SYSE.47 - Construct and Revise an Agent’s Execution Procedure | Candidate | Keywords: operative sequence, consumed return, transition, written procedure, controller, recovery, stop. Queries: “Why does available material fail to advance the task?” “What sequence can this performer actually enact?” Connect supplied operations through usable inputs, progress, recovery and completion. | SYSE.25/.26–28/.40/.42–46/.48–52; ME.6/.7; MMP.8.SD/.17 |
| 48 | SYSE.48 - Construct and Maintain Reusable Tools and Procedures | Candidate | Keywords: candidate operation, worksheet, parameterization, new input, defeating case, discovery, variant. Queries: “Which operation can be recovered from these attempts?” “Will the aid work on another input?” Construct and qualify the aid, expose its use and consolidate only demonstrated overlap. | ME.10/.15; ME.21 for allocation; SYSE.26/.27/.39/.42/.46/.47/.49/.52 |
| 49 | SYSE.49 - Construct Informative Tasks and Feedback Environments for Agent Work | Candidate | Keywords: informative experience, practice material, fixture, feedback, shared error, transfer. Queries: “Which interaction exposes this failure?” “Could the task and its judge share a mistake?” Construct the needed material/state, qualified feedback and usable experience for a named consumer. | HCD.6/.7/.11–13; SYSE.33/.45–48/.50/.51; MMP.17; SYSE.10; CMP.7 |
| 50 | SYSE.50 - Construct and Calibrate an Agent’s Assistance Policy | Candidate | Keywords: assistance, accessible signal, benefit, need, confidence, calibration, fallback. Queries: “Which observable condition should change the help decision?” “Can an aid be worthwhile despite unaided ability?” Construct and test a performer-relative assistance rule with qualified grounds and costs. | C.38/C.11; A.15.7/.15.9; SYSE.45–47/.49/.51/.52; HCD |
| 51 | SYSE.51 - Construct Adaptive Control of Reasoning and Tool Effort | Candidate | Keywords: further reasoning, tool effort, time, samples, branches, completion reserve, early stop. Queries: “Which further move can improve this result?” “Can we still finish after it?” Construct an observable allocation rule and compare complete success and burden with fixed/manual allocation. | C.11/.DUA; CMP.4; SYSE.39/.40/.45–47/.49/.50/.52 |
| 52 | SYSE.52 - Prepare Working Material and Tools for an Agent’s Next Step | Candidate | Keywords: readable layout, carry, working input, summary, pointer, evidence loss, tool view, recovery. Queries: “What must the next step actually receive?” “Did selection hide a decisive condition?” Prepare usable material and tools, exercise the continuation and restore consequential omissions. | SYSE.42/.43/.46/.47/.50/.51; EXD.1/.3/.6; HCD |