Assumption supplies the genus: A proposition treated as true for the purposes of some reasoning without being currently demonstrated within it, forming the load-bearing layer between what is given and what is concluded. Distributional Assumption preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Commitment to assume uncertain quantities follow specific distribution. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.

Distributional Assumption is a specialization of Assumption, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.


A distributional assumption presupposes probability because the commitment to normal, exponential, power-law, or any other shape family is a commitment within probability's apparatus -- the assignment of coherent numerical weights over outcomes obeying additivity, normalization, and conditioning. Without probability's framework of sample space, events, and measure, there is no distribution to assume, no parametric structure to impose, and no model risk to bear. The assumption is a chosen restriction within the infinite-dimensional space of probability distributions probability theory provides. Probability supplies the prerequisite condition: Quantifies uncertainty and likelihoods. Distributional Assumption operates against that background: Commitment to assume uncertain quantities follow specific distribution. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.

A distributional assumption presupposes probability because it commits to a specific probability distribution shape for uncertain quantities.


A distributional assumption is a structural commitment to model uncertain quantities under a specific probability-distribution family, made in service of drawing conclusions from samples about populations or future outcomes. Without statistical inference's machinery — reasoning from finite observations to underlying processes with explicit accounting for sampling variability and model uncertainty — there would be no purpose to imposing distributional structure on data. Statistical inference supplies the reasoning context that makes the distributional-assumption choice a load-bearing modeling decision rather than mere descriptive labeling.

Distributional assumption presupposes statistical inference because the commitment to a distribution family is meaningful only within the inferential reasoning it enables.


Distributional_effects is the critical recognition of what the aggregation operation conceals — the vector behind the scalar; it presupposes aggregation as the collapsing step. Aggregation supplies the prerequisite condition: Deliberately collapsing many items into a single summary, choosing which information to discard to gain tractability. Distributional Effects operates against that background: An aggregate outcome conceals systematically heterogeneous, unit-level changes. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


Divergence-convergence is structured as a recurring cycle: a divergence phase generates breadth, a convergence phase narrows to a chosen candidate, and the process then re-opens to another divergence phase at finer grain. Without iteration's machinery — repeated application of a process with state carried between rounds and a notion of progress measured across them — there would be no way to organize the design process as cumulative cycles; the expand-and-narrow moves would collapse into a single non-recurring sequence rather than a productive macro-structure.

Divergence-convergence in the design process presupposes iteration because its expand-then-narrow phases recur cyclically with each cycle building on the previous one.


Divergence-convergence is the cyclical macro-structure of disciplined design: a divergence phase deliberately expands the space of candidate framings and concepts, followed by a convergence phase that evaluates and narrows. The divergence phase is itself a variation strategy — controlled injection of variety into a process to surface alternatives. Variation strategies supplies the general practice of using variation as a deliberate tool to surface options and escape local optima. Divergence-convergence presupposes that practice as the engine of its divergence half, on which the subsequent convergence selection then operates.

Divergence-convergence presupposes variation strategies because the divergence phase systematically generates the variety the convergence phase then selects from.


Operates to reduce the variance of a total outcome over multiple exposures, each with its own uncertainty; presupposes risk (a known distribution of outcomes to manage). Risk supplies the prerequisite condition: Exposure to a known distribution of possible outcomes. Diversification operates against that background: Spreading exposures across positions whose failure modes are uncorrelated reduces total-outcome variance; correlation, not count, drives the benefit. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Division of labor is the system-level partitioning of joint production into distinct sub-tasks assigned to distinct performers whose specialized outputs are re-integrated. This rests on specialization: components narrowing to distinct partial functions rather than remaining general-purpose, trading self-sufficiency for higher collective performance through narrowing, complementarity, and integration. Smith's pin-factory analysis is the same observation in both directions. Without specialization's narrowing-plus-complementarity structure, the partitioned sub-tasks could not yield the productivity gain that distinguishes division of labor from mere parallel duplication of the whole task.

Division of labor presupposes specialization because partitioning a joint task into narrow assigned roles depends on each performer narrowing function.


Dose-response relationship is a specialization of function. Specifically, it instantiates the rule-assigning-each-input-exactly-one-output structure with dose as domain element and response magnitude as codomain element, capturing the Paracelsus insight that toxicity is a quantity-function rather than a substance-property. It commits to determinism in the function-theoretic sense -- same dose, same expected response in the specified system -- and is parameterized by characteristic shape features (potency, efficacy, slope, threshold, ceiling) that distinguish it from a mere correlation or noisy relation.

Dose-response relationship is a specialization of function (mapping) that assigns response magnitudes deterministically to dose levels.


Dose-response relationship presupposes nonlinearity because the canonical dose-response curve is structurally nonlinear: it exhibits thresholds below which response is negligible, sigmoidal rise through a sensitive range, and saturation at a ceiling effect. The function's clinically meaningful shape parameters (potency, efficacy, slope, threshold, ceiling) are precisely the features of a nonlinear input-output relation. Without the prior commitment that scaling inputs need not scale outputs proportionally and that thresholds and saturation are structural rather than accidental, dose-response would collapse to a trivial linear scaling.

Dose-response relationship presupposes nonlinearity because the characteristic curves are sigmoidal with thresholds, saturation, and ceilings rather than proportional.


'double counting is aggregation, just aggregation that has gone wrong at a specific place' — it presupposes the aggregation operation and is the failure where overlapping buckets are summed without subtracting |A n B|. Presupposes-parent, not is a specialization of. Aggregation supplies the prerequisite condition: Deliberately collapsing many items into a single summary, choosing which information to discard to gain tractability. Double Counting operates against that background: Including the same underlying unit more than once in an aggregate because overlapping buckets are summed without subtracting their intersection. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


Downward causation presupposes causality because the claim that wholes causally constrain or shape their parts requires the full four-component causal relation -- antecedent, consequent, productive connection, and modal robustness -- to hold across the hierarchical boundary. Without causality's apparatus, downward influence collapses to mere description or correlation. The controversial commitment of the prime is precisely that the higher level satisfies cause-component requirements (counterfactual sensitivity, productive linkage) with respect to lower-level dynamics, not just that aggregate descriptions are explanatorily useful.

Downward causation presupposes causality because it asserts genuine cause-effect influence flowing from higher levels back to lower-level constituents.


Downward causation claims that higher-level structures causally influence the behavior of their lower-level constituents. That claim requires the higher level to exist as a causally relevant level of organization with properties not trivially reducible to lower-level descriptions — exactly what Emergence supplies. Without emergent higher-level structure there is no upper terminus from which downward influence could flow. Downward causation presupposes emergence as the structural precondition that establishes the levels between which downward influence is asserted to run.

Downward Causation presupposes Emergence: it requires a higher level whose properties are not reducible to lower-level constituents.


Downward causation asserts that influence flows from higher strata back onto their lower-level constituents. That assertion requires a stratified architecture in which strata are distinguishable, each with its own descriptive vocabulary and operational regime — the structure supplied by Layering. Without a layered organization there is no higher stratum from which influence could descend and no lower stratum to receive it. Downward causation presupposes layering as the structural substrate that makes upward and downward causal directions meaningfully distinct.

Downward Causation presupposes Layering: it requires a stratified architecture in which higher strata can influence lower ones.


The downward context edge (macro reshapes micro situations) — 'the other half'. After the philosophy frame is stripped away, the retained structural roles are those of Micro Macro Linkage: A two-way bridge by which micro units produce macro regularities and macro conditions reshape the micro situation. Downward Causation adds the local frame and commitments expressed in its identity: Higher-level influence. The parent pattern remains recognizable without that vocabulary, while the child is the framed realization of it. That preservation test establishes decomposition rather than taxonomic subsumption.


A phase transition/bifurcation near criticality is the mechanism (second generator) dragon-king theory invokes; the prime is the statistical SIGNATURE and diagnostic built around it. Part-to-whole: presupposes the critical-transition mechanism but adds the bimodal-tail test and precursor families. Tipping Points (or Phase Transitions) supplies the prerequisite condition: Abrupt state change. Dragon King Theory operates against that background: The largest events in some complex systems come from a distinct mechanism — synchronization or bifurcation near criticality — leaving them above the power-law tail and partly predictable. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


The Dunning-Kruger effect is a specialization of bias. The general bias pattern is systematic, signed displacement of outputs from a true value, persisting beyond noise. Dunning-Kruger specializes by giving the displacement a specific shape: self-assessment of competence is systematically displaced upward at low competence and modestly downward at high competence, with the same metacognitive deficit producing both the incompetence and the failure to recognize it. The same systematic-rather-than-random-displacement logic of bias applies, with self-assessment as the estimating process and the competence gap as the specific cause of the offset.

Dunning-Kruger effect is a specialization of bias in which low-competence individuals systematically overestimate their own competence.


The Dunning-Kruger effect is the pattern in which low-competence individuals overestimate their competence because they lack the metacognitive apparatus to recognize their lack. The effect is constitutively a failure of second-order monitoring: judging one's own performance, identifying gaps, calibrating confidence. Metacognition supplies precisely that monitoring capacity — representing and evaluating one's own cognitive processes. Without metacognition as a structural commitment of cognitive systems, there would be no self-assessment operation to fail and no double-curse mechanism in which the missing competence and the missing self-awareness coincide.

Dunning-Kruger effect presupposes metacognition because the self-assessment failure it names is a failure of monitoring one's own competence.


Dynamic programming is the specific shape decomposition takes when the whole is a decision problem with optimal substructure and overlapping subproblems. The breaking-into-recombinable-parts pattern that decomposition names manifests here as identifying subproblems whose optimal solutions combine into the parent's optimum; the overlap means the same parts recur, making memoization or bottom-up tabulation transform exponential recursion into polynomial computation. Optimal substructure is the reversibility-and-recombinability condition decomposition presupposes, sharpened for optimization contexts. After the operations_research frame is stripped away, the retained structural roles are those of Decomposition: Breaking a whole into parts that can be analyzed independently and recombined to reconstitute the whole, making complexity tractable through divide-and-conquer. Dynamic Programming adds the local frame and commitments expressed in its identity: Solve via subproblem reuse. The parent pattern remains recognizable without that vocabulary, while the child is the framed realization of it. That preservation test establishes decomposition rather than taxonomic subsumption.

Dynamic programming is the specific shape decomposition takes when subproblems overlap and optimal substructure lets cached solutions compose into the full answer.


Dynamic programming is the specific shape optimization takes when the problem has optimal substructure (the optimal solution can be assembled from optimal solutions to subproblems) and overlapping subproblems (the same subproblems recur many times). Optimization in general is the search over a feasible set for an element maximizing or minimizing an objective subject to constraints. DP instantiates this by exploiting recursive structure: the search is decomposed across stages or subproblems, results cached, and assembled bottom-up or top-down. Bellman's principle of optimality is what licenses the recursive decomposition into a polynomial-time procedure.

Dynamic programming is the specific shape optimization takes when problems exhibit optimal substructure and overlapping subproblems.


Dynamic programming solves problems by decomposing them into overlapping subproblems whose solutions are stored and reused, exploiting optimal substructure. This presupposes recurrence: the structural property by which a pattern, condition, or value reappears across iterations, classically formalized as recurrence relations. The Bellman equation is precisely such a recurrence: the optimal value at stage n is a function of optimal values at smaller subproblems. Both memoization and tabulation are mechanisms for exploiting the reappearance of the same subproblem; without recurrence as the structural reason that the same subproblems recur, DP's caching strategy yields no speedup.

Dynamic programming presupposes recurrence because its decomposition into overlapping subproblems is expressed as a Bellman recurrence relation.


Echo chamber is constituted by a self-reinforcing positive-feedback loop plus loss of the corrective negative-feedback signal. Feedback supplies the prerequisite condition: Outputs influence inputs. Echo Chamber operates against that background: A bounded community whose input filter and internal reinforcement gradient amplify shared beliefs and strip out the corrective signal that would moderate them, while members experience the environment as complete rather than filtered. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


Each successional stage modifies its own substrate to determine which stage comes next — a path-dependent, order-locked sequence. Path Dependence supplies the genus: Outcomes are shaped by the specific historical sequence of past choices, which lock in consequences and foreclose alternatives that persist despite present incentives to change. Ecological Succession preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Stage-ordered change in which the current occupants themselves modify the substrate, determining which stage can come next through facilitation, inhibition, or tolerance. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Stage-ordered occupancy through a sequence of states; succession is the specialization where the current stage modifies its own substrate to gate the next. State and State Transition supplies the genus: Captures system condition and evolution. Ecological Succession preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Stage-ordered change in which the current occupants themselves modify the substrate, determining which stage can come next through facilitation, inhibition, or tolerance. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Economies of scale are a kind of increasing returns specialized to the supply side: as the cumulative scale of production grows, average cost per unit declines because fixed costs spread, specialization deepens, larger equipment becomes viable, and learning accumulates. It inherits the general pattern that the marginal benefit of additional input rises with the cumulative state variable, producing self-reinforcing advantage, and supplies the specific case where the accumulating variable is production volume and the increasing-returns mechanism operates through declining unit cost rather than rising user utility.

Economies of scale are a specialization of increasing returns in which average cost per unit falls as production scale grows.


Scale names the general fact that system properties and governing laws vary as size or aggregation level changes, so the system at one scale may be qualitatively different from at another. Economies of scale is the particular shape this pattern takes when expansion lowers average cost per unit through fixed-cost spreading, deeper specialization, larger-equipment viability, bulk purchasing, and accumulated learning. It is a structurally-particularized instance of band-specific behavior in which the favorable band makes growth self-reinforcing and can reshape industry competitive structure.

Economies of scale is the specific shape scale takes when growth lowers per-unit cost through fixed-cost spreading, specialization, and learning.


Economies of scope is the cost-synergy particularization of synergy and antagonism: joint production of distinct outputs produces a combined cost lower than the additive baseline of stand-alone production, because a shared indivisible resource is amortized across heterogeneous uses. Where synergy and antagonism names deviations from a baseline combination rule generally, scope economies specify the baseline (additive cost) and the direction of deviation (sub-additive), with the interaction being the amortization mechanic of the shared substrate.

Economies of scope is the specific shape synergy and antagonism takes when shared resources across heterogeneous outputs make joint production cheaper than separate production.


Economy of force is a specialized allocation rule: drive non-decisive efforts to their minimum-viable floor so freed mass concentrates at the decisive point. It is allocation (assign limited supply across competing claimants) plus a decisiveness gradient + minimum-viable threshold + reserve.


An ecotone is a boundary GIVEN DEPTH — it presupposes a boundary between two regimes and adds a band of measurable extent, gradient, exchange, and zone-specific generative structure. It is not an is-a of boundary (a boundary is a curve; the ecotone is the opposite — a generative band) so composition, not subsumption.


The band forms AROUND a boundary line of two abutting regimes; presupposes boundary as the reference locus (file explicitly band-not-line, but the line is the reference the band forms around). Boundary supplies the prerequisite condition: Defines system limits. Edge Effect operates against that background: Where two regimes meet, a thin high-gradient band forms a distinct third regime with its own resident phenomena, absent from either interior. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


The edge effect is the band of phenomena a STEEPENED gradient drives at a regime boundary; it presupposes gradient (the rate-of-change) as its load-bearing ingredient. 'The gradient is an ingredient, not the prime.'. Gradient supplies the prerequisite condition: Distribution and change over space/time. Edge Effect operates against that background: Where two regimes meet, a thin high-gradient band forms a distinct third regime with its own resident phenomena, absent from either interior. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


Editorial independence is the STRUCTURAL condition that secures credible (impartial-seeming) judgment regardless of the evaluator's disposition — it relocates impartiality from a disposition to an institutional firewall ('s central move). Impartiality supplies the prerequisite condition: Treatment that depends only on relevant features and is invariant under the identity of the party involved. Editorial Independence operates against that background: An evaluative judgment institutionally insulated from the parties it affects. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Effect size quantifies the magnitude of a relationship or difference in substantive, interpretable units, separately from statistical significance. This presupposes comparison: placing items under a shared frame, selecting a dimension along which they are co-considered, applying an alignment rule, and reading off a relation. An effect size is precisely such a reading: it requires comparands (typically treatment and control, or two conditions), a shared scale, and an alignment rule that makes the difference commensurable. Without comparison's operation of generating relational information, the magnitude has nothing to be the magnitude of.

Effect size presupposes comparison because magnitude is read off the relation between two or more co-considered quantities.


Effect size presupposes scale because reporting magnitude in interpretable units requires a chosen scale -- raw difference, standardized mean difference, odds ratio, variance explained -- against which the effect is sized. Without scale's commitment to specifying size, resolution, or unit of aggregation, there is no axis along which to express how large the deviation from zero is and no comparison across studies on a common dimension. Effect size is the scale at which a relationship is described, separated from the significance question of whether it differs from zero. Scale supplies the prerequisite condition: Properties change with size. Effect Size operates against that background: Magnitude of effect. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.

Effect size presupposes scale because it quantifies the magnitude of an observed relationship in substantive units of measurement.


'not predictive coding in general; efference copy is the specific self-versus-world attribution built from broadcasting a command copy to the perceiver.' predictive_coding (predict input, propagate error) is the genus; efference copy is the self-attribution specialization. Predictive Coding supplies the genus: A system predicts its input and propagates only the prediction error. Efference Copy preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Routing an internal copy of a command to the perceiver so self-caused effects can be predicted and subtracted, leaving only the world-caused remainder. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


An arrangement is efficient only relative to actual or counterfactual alternatives aligned on the same outputs, resource dimensions, and acceptance criteria. Without Comparison's co-framing and relation read-off there is no dominance test, frontier, or removable slack—only an ungrounded praise word.

Efficiency presupposes comparison because its verdict exists only relative to feasible alternatives evaluated under a shared input–output frame.


Technology, resource, quality, safety, reliability, and regime constraints determine which alternatives are genuinely available. Remove or omit one and the frontier moves, so the same operating point may change from efficient to inefficient or the reverse.

Efficiency presupposes constraints because they define the feasible alternatives against which resource use and result are judged.


It inherits a direct improvement, a coupled adaptive response, and graded offset accounting. It adds efficiency as the intervention, effective per-unit cost as the changed condition, activity volume as the response, and resource saving as the quantity being offset.

Efficiency rebound is a counterresponse offset specialized to demand expansion induced by an efficiency-driven fall in effective unit cost.


Without an input-output improvement at fixed output there is no expected per-unit saving for expanded activity to consume. Efficiency supplies the direct gain; the rebound describes the aggregate response after unit cost falls.

The rebound begins with a genuine efficiency gain that reduces resources required per unit of service.


Direct rebounds in market activities are naturally parameterized by price elasticity. Indirect, economy-wide, and shadow-price responses can occur without a single observable market-price elasticity, so the dependency is typical rather than strict.

The magnitude of efficiency rebound is typically governed by how strongly activity volume responds to the resulting fall in effective price.


The efficient market hypothesis presupposes financial arbitrage because its central claim — that asset prices incorporate all available information so quickly and completely that no strategy yields systematic risk-adjusted excess returns — rests on a prior mechanism: aggressive arbitrage by informed traders impounds information into prices. Without arbitrage's structure of exploiting price discrepancies and thereby closing them, there is no force driving prices toward fundamental value. EMH inherits arbitrage's convergence dynamic and supplies the macro-level consequence: in the limit of frictionless competitive arbitrage, prices reflect information and arbitrage opportunities disappear.

The efficient market hypothesis presupposes financial arbitrage because the mechanism by which prices incorporate information is competitive arbitrage trading.


The live identity is eigen-structure for a linear transformation. Its invariant-direction equation, modal decomposition, basis expansion, and independent scalar gains all depend on homogeneity and additivity. Fixed Point is not the genus: an eigenvector with eigenvalue other than one changes magnitude, and a projective-direction reinterpretation changes the map and discards the eigenvalue component.

Eigenvalue/Eigenvector structure strictly presupposes Linearity because scalar multiples and sums must be respected by the operator whose equation is Av = λv.


Eigenpairs are a fingerprint of an operator, not the operator itself. Every admitted case requires a transformation acting on a space before one can ask which nonzero directions it merely scales and by what factor. The eigen-structure adds the invariant directions, scalar gains, spectrum, dominant mode, and spectral gap.

Every Eigenvalue/Eigenvector pair is defined relative to a transformation whose invariant directions and scalar gains it records.


The channel-crossing test asks which hidden-state distinctions survive and which recorded differences are attributable to the channel. Observability supplies the prerequisite condition: Infer internal state externally. Elicitation Channel Contribution operates against that background: The recorded representation of a system's unobserved state is a joint product of state and the elicitation channel, so the analyst's marginal of interest is recoverable only by controlling the channel. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.

Elicitation channel contribution presupposes observability because it diagnoses how a constructed output channel limits recovery of an internal state from the outputs it produces.


The answer, label, score, testimony, or model output is a channel-produced representation rather than the internal state itself. Representation supplies an internal constituent: Model complex ideas. Elicitation Channel Contribution requires that role within this mechanism: The recorded representation of a system's unobserved state is a joint product of state and the elicitation channel, so the analyst's marginal of interest is recoverable only by controlling the channel. Remove the parent-role and the child loses a required internal operation, even though the parent can exist outside the child. The child is therefore built from the parent rather than being a taxonomic kind of it.

Elicitation channel contribution contains representation because the channel maps a target state into a recorded medium under a faithfulness claim whose systematic distortion is being diagnosed.


Constraint supplies the hard predicate defining feasibility. Embeddability specializes the decision object to faithful placements of a substrate into a host and asks whether the admissible placement set is empty, without ranking the survivors.

Embeddability requires binding ambient and conflict Constraints that divide possible placements into admissible and forbidden sets.


Embedding supplies the possible faithful placements from substrate to host. Embeddability adds the ambient limits, a conflict predicate, the existential yes-or-no gate, a hardness landscape, and the remediation triangle when no admissible witness exists.

Embeddability requires the class of structure-preserving injective Embeddings whose conflict-free subset is tested for non-emptiness.


Embedding is 'the FAITHFUL INJECTIVE special case' of representation — representation models A by B in any (possibly lossy, many-to-one) way; embedding adds injectivity and structure-preservation. A specialization of representation. Representation supplies the genus: Model complex ideas. Embedding preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A structure-preserving injection of one system faithfully into a richer one. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


The upward aggregation edge (micro produces macro regularities) — 'emergence is half the pattern'. After the systems_cybernetics frame is stripped away, the retained structural roles are those of Micro Macro Linkage: A two-way bridge by which micro units produce macro regularities and macro conditions reshape the micro situation. Emergence adds the local frame and commitments expressed in its identity: Complex patterns from simple rules. The parent pattern remains recognizable without that vocabulary, while the child is the framed realization of it. That preservation test establishes decomposition rather than taxonomic subsumption.


Emergent formalization is the structurally-particularized form emergence takes in the diachronic-linguistic case: the lower-level constituents are token usages and chunking events in speech communities, the higher-level phenomenon is grammatical rule status, the sense of novelty is that the rule has properties (productivity, obligatoriness) absent from any single token, and the conditions are the frequency and conventionalization thresholds that grammaticalization requires. It satisfies emergence's four-part specification, particularized to language change.

Emergent formalization is the specific shape emergence takes when informal usage patterns crystallize into formal grammatical structure over time.


The emic scheme is positioned inside participants' competence and the etic scheme outside it under a comparative analytic framework. Remove positioned access from either description and the paired distinction collapses; the method adds distinct closure rules and treats divergence between the two views as evidence rather than error.

Emic/etic analysis contains two coordinated viewpoints whose insider and outsider stations generate different access, occlusion, and bias profiles.


Emotional contagion is a specialization of contagion: an affective state spreads from one agent to a connected one through automatic coupling — mimicry of facial expression, postural synchrony, vocal entrainment — and reproduces in each new host whose own affect is then a fresh transmission source. It inherits contagion's structural commitments — contact-mediated, self-reproducing across a network, governed by transmission rate and contact topology — particularized to the affective-state case where the channel is largely sub-deliberative.

Emotional contagion is a kind of contagion in which affective states spread through automatic mimicry, synchrony, and afferent feedback.


Bias is the structural property of a process whose outputs are systematically displaced in a consistent direction from a true or fair value. Emotional reasoning is one such process: it systematically inflates the probability of threats when fear is felt and of wrongness when guilt is felt, treating affective state as inferential input about external reality. It inherits bias's directional-offset structure and adds the specific mechanism — affect-as-evidence — that produces a sign and a direction in the error. A specialization of bias keyed to emotion as the contaminating channel.

Emotional reasoning is a specialization of bias; it is the systematic distortion of belief by treating felt affect as evidence about the world.


Emotional reasoning presupposes cognitive appraisal because the distortion consists in treating a felt emotional state as evidence about external reality — and that felt emotion is precisely the output of appraisal's primary and secondary evaluative processes. Without cognitive appraisal's machinery for generating emotion as the configured response to a construed situation, there would be no affective input for the reasoner to mistake as inferential evidence. Cognitive appraisal supplies the emotion-generation operation; emotional reasoning is the downstream short-circuit that collapses the distinction between the appraised feeling and the unappraised facts.

Emotional reasoning presupposes cognitive appraisal because treating felt emotion as evidence about reality requires a prior appraisal-generated affective state to misuse.


Emphasis presupposes attention because the mechanism of foregrounding selected information against a contrast background is operationally aimed at directing scarce attentional allocation toward the foregrounded element. Without attention's gating function — the selective allocation of limited processing to a subset of available information — emphasis vehicles like stress, typography, position, and syntactic marking would have no asymmetric effect to produce, since all input would be processed equally. Attention supplies the scarcity that makes selective allocation meaningful; emphasis supplies the technique that biases the allocation toward chosen content.

Emphasis presupposes attention because foregrounding selected information against a background only matters as a mechanism for directing scarce attentional resources.


Figure-ground organizes a perceptual field into a salient figure attended as a bounded object and a recessive ground treated as continuing context. Emphasis is the particular shape this organization takes when the field is informational — prose, speech, image, layout — and a deliberate vehicle (prosody, typography, position, syntax) elevates one element above the rest. It is a structurally-particularized instance of the figure-ground primitive whose specific machinery is rhetorical or formatting choice that produces foreground-background contrast in a communicative medium.

Emphasis is the specific shape figure-ground takes in rhetorical and linguistic foregrounding of selected content.


A focal point is a specialization of emphasis in which the foregrounding operates spatially within a visual field or composition, directing the viewer's attention to a designated area as the primary site of interest. It inherits emphasis's general structure of foregrounding a selected element against a contrast background through a vehicle that produces salience, and specializes by fixing the medium to visual composition and the vehicle to the perceptual mechanisms — placement, contrast, size, isolation, directional flow — that orchestrate attention. Other elements remain subordinate, supporting rather than competing with the focal area.

A focal point is a specialization of emphasis in which the foregrounded element is positioned to register as the primary site of attention in a visual field.


The anchor contains a null finding whose boundary force exists only through the test apparatus's probability of detecting a present failure. Remove the detection-side counterfactual and a passed level can no longer constrain the failure boundary; it becomes an uninterpretable silence rather than an empirical no-failure anchor. parent_in_child


A maximum passed input level presupposes an ordered mapping from input intensity to the specified response or failure criterion. Without comparable response observations across ordered input levels there is no maximum clean level, no adjacent failed level, and no input-axis bound. The anchor is one selected test coordinate plus its provenance; a dose- response relationship is the full mapping across the tested or modeled range.


The anchor presupposes a designed investigation that fixes tested levels, sampled units, duration, endpoints, replication, and the detection apparatus. Changing dose spacing, sample size, duration, endpoint sensitivity, or replication can move the highest passed level while the underlying system stays fixed; without a designed test regime the anchor has no identity. The anchor is an output statistic and boundary claim produced by a design; Experimental Design is the wider architecture for gathering comparative or causal evidence.


The anchor is a projection specialized to reducing the full test-response dataset to the maximal tested level that cleared a stated failure criterion. Both map a richer source onto a lower-dimensional target by a fixed direction, discard a residual that must remain named, and are stable when reapplied to the same source under the same rule. The child fixes the source to an ordered test-response dataset, the target to one scalar input level, the direction to maximal non-detected failure, and the residual to untested or discarded boundary information.


'Not bare set_and_membership... the relationship is parent-and-special-instance.' The empty set is the one distinguished member of the set apparatus carrying specific algebraic roles (union identity, base case, vacuous truth). Set and Membership supplies the genus: Groups and categorizes elements. Empty Set preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Absence made into a fully-typed, first-class object rather than an error. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.

Empty Set is a specialization of Set and Membership, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.


Encoding and decoding brackets a channel with two distinct mappings, each having an input, scheme-governed restructuring rule, output, and explicit preservation or loss commitments. The pair adds shared-scheme coordination, channel placement, and a localized failure taxonomy beyond either constituent transformation.

Encoding and decoding contains two coordinated rule-governed transformations, content to code and code back to recovered content.


'associative memory is the mechanism that retrieves by cue; encoding specificity is the PRINCIPLE that retrievability depends on overlap between encoding-context and retrieval-cue features' — it governs/uses that mechanism, adding the context-as-key claim. Presupposes-parent. Associative Memory supplies the prerequisite condition: Content-addressable storage where a cue retrieves linked content. Encoding Specificity operates against that background: Retrievability depends on the overlap between features active at encoding and features available at retrieval, because context is co-encoded into the storage key. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


The physical or informational layer persists when no one currently occupies it, admits changing occupants under a stable hosting rule, and remains addressable as a place of contact. It adds stranger-inclusive access, reciprocal visibility, norm governance, and a durability horizon sufficient for new ties to form.

An encounter surface is a persistent hosting site specialized to stranger contact, adding accessibility, mutual observability, shared norms, and sufficient duration for new ties to form.


Enculturation is the specific shape internalization takes when the externally-originating items are the explicit rules and tacit patterns of a culture — kinship terminology, aesthetic preferences, decision-making heuristics, emotional norms — and the inward-taking proceeds through sustained exposure, observation, and practice within a social group. It is a structurally-particularized instance of an external repertoire crossing into the agent and becoming endogenous, with the added commitment that the source is the encompassing cultural milieu rather than a discrete norm or relationship, and that the process runs lifelong with childhood as the window of most intense acquisition.

Enculturation is the specific shape internalization takes when an individual absorbs the patterns of their culture across the lifespan.


Engineering tolerances presuppose approximation because specifying a permissible range around a nominal target is the manufacturing-and-measurement instance of substituting a tractable surrogate for an unachievable exact specification while keeping the error bounded and named. Approximation supplies the general discipline that the error is controlled, characterized, and absorbable by the use case; tolerances supply the specific case where the intractable target is exact dimensional or material specification and the surrogate is the permitted variation range that the downstream design can absorb without functional compromise.

Engineering tolerances presuppose approximation because defining permissible ranges around a nominal target is bounded-error substitution applied to manufacturing.


Constraint is a condition that restricts admissible configurations to those satisfying it, defining the feasible set as a first-class object. Engineering tolerances is the particular shape this pattern takes in manufacturing and design: admissible variation is bounded by explicit upper and lower limits around a nominal target value, with components inside the band accepted and those outside rejected or reworked. It is a structurally-particularized instance of constraint whose specific machinery is dimensional, material, or temporal range specification calibrated to what the design can absorb while still functioning.

Engineering tolerances is the specific shape constraint takes when admissible variation around a nominal target is explicitly bounded for component acceptance.


Tolerances are a specification method built from a pair of thresholds (upper/lower bounds), not themselves a kind of single threshold. Threshold supplies the prerequisite condition: Safe vs harmful levels. Engineering Tolerances operates against that background: Acceptable variation. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


The live Ensemble identity explicitly requires an aggregation rule that combines member outputs into ensemble-level quantities while retaining selected distributional features and suppressing some trajectory detail. Aggregation is therefore a strict constituent. The ensemble as a whole is broader than that operation: it also includes the member population, the generation mechanism, uncertainty coverage, and a representativeness warrant, so subsumption would conflate the analyzed collection with one operation performed on it.

Every Ensemble contains an Aggregation rule that maps its member realizations to ensemble-level means, spreads, quantiles, votes, densities, or other distributional outputs.


Every Ensemble admitted by this entry treats comparable realizations as draws or weighted possibilities under a population or generating model and interprets their spread, quantiles, or frequencies distributionally. Probability supplies the normalized measure, event, weighting, and conditioning apparatus that makes those claims meaningful. The ensemble is not itself a numerical event measure; it adds a member collection, generation protocol, aggregation rule, and representativeness claim.

Ensemble strictly presupposes Probability because its members are treated as weighted or sampled realizations of a distribution whose uncertainty is to be characterized.


Entanglement is a specialization of coupling in which the dynamic linkage is implemented through a single joint quantum state that cannot be factored into independent subsystem states. It inherits the general coupling commitment that interaction structure makes one subsystem's state input to another's, and specializes by making that linkage non-classical: the resulting correlations violate Bell-type inequalities and cannot be explained by any local hidden-variable account. The whole carries irreducibly joint information about correlations that no decomposition into part-properties can recover.

Entanglement is a specialization of coupling in which the linkage is a non-factorable joint quantum state producing irreducibly joint correlations.


Entanglement is the quantum-mechanical condition in which subsystems are described by a single joint state that cannot be factored into independent subsystem states, so the value of measurements on one is correlated with measurements on another in ways no local description supports. That irreducible reliance of one subsystem's specification on another is the structure of Dependency — one element cannot be characterized or acted on independently of another. Entanglement specializes dependency to joint quantum states.

Entanglement is a kind of dependency: subsystems acquire a directed reliance such that one's state cannot be specified without the other's.


Quantum entanglement 'reinstated genuine non-locality' — entangled measurement correlations are non-local in the strict (Bell) sense. non_locality is the more-general parent. Additive: entanglement keeps coupling;dependency. Non-Locality supplies the genus: Distant elements influence or correlate with each other without a chain of contiguous intervening contact — coupling that jumps the substrate rather than propagating through neighbors. Entanglement preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Linked distant states. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


The emitted fragment reaches its conclusion only when the receiver inserts the unstated premise; remove that assumption and the rhetorical syllogism is incomplete rather than merely concise.

A load-bearing premise supplied from the audience's assumption base is a constitutive part of an enthymeme.


Environmental coupling strength quantifies flow across the demarcation between system and environment, with permeability of that demarcation setting how strongly the two interact. The very concept of crossing — of flow across a separation — requires a Boundary already drawn that establishes inside, outside, and the rule governing transit. Without a boundary there is no surface across which coupling could be measured. Environmental coupling strength presupposes boundary as the demarcation whose permeability it characterizes.

Environmental Coupling Strength presupposes Boundary: the coupling is defined as the cross-boundary flow rate between system and environment.


Environmental coupling strength presupposes coupling because it quantifies the intensity of one designated coupling relationship: the rate at which energy, information, or material crosses the boundary between a system and its environment. Without the prior availability of coupling as a dynamic link by which state in one subsystem becomes input to another, there is nothing for a strength parameter to grade. Coupling supplies the general interaction structure; environmental coupling strength fixes one specific instance of it and reads its magnitude.

Environmental coupling strength presupposes coupling because it is the quantified intensity of one specific coupling relationship between a system and its environment.


Environmental coupling strength quantifies the rate at which energy, information, or material flows across a system boundary, with strong coupling forcing joint description of system plus environment and weak coupling licensing isolated description. That is a Scale claim — the level of aggregation or resolution at which the system can be coherently described depends on the coupling magnitude, with qualitative changes in the appropriate ontology across the band. The prime specializes scale to the dimension of system-environment interaction rate.

Environmental Coupling Strength is a kind of scale: it quantifies the band of interaction rate at which system and environment must be co-described.


Environmental scanning is a specialization of foresight whose distinctive move is a continuous, organized monitoring function partitioning the external environment into bounded categories — social, technological, economic, environmental, political, legal — with explicit sources, cadence, and ownership. It inherits foresight's commitment to structured anticipation that turns the future into an object of disciplined inquiry, and adds the operational architecture of a named, ongoing organizational sensing function rather than ad-hoc awareness, supplying the monitoring layer of the broader foresight methods stack.

Environmental scanning is a specific foresight practice that continuously monitors external factor categories for strategically relevant changes.


Environmental scanning is a specialization of monitoring in which the observed system is the organization's external environment — social, technological, economic, political, legal factors — and the function is to detect relevant changes, emerging trends, and threats that may affect strategy. It inherits monitoring's general structure of continuous observation, threshold comparison, and triggered response, and specializes by fixing the observed domain to outside-the-firm conditions, by partitioning the environment into bounded categories for tractability, and by tying the alerting logic to strategic-planning implications rather than to operational deviation from a setpoint.

Environmental scanning is a specialization of monitoring in which the observed system is the organization's external environment.


It trades capacity-bounded internal work for an external configuration and retrieval coupling, adding the differentia that the physical action serves cognition rather than directly advancing the task goal.

Epistemic action is cognitive offloading specialized to manipulating the environment so it performs or exposes part of the next computation.


Epistemic humility is the structurally-particularized form calibration takes in the epistemic case: the system's output is expressed confidence in claims, the trusted external standard is evidential warrant, and the adjustment is the disciplined practice of matching expressed certainty to evidential strength. It inherits calibration's alignment-to-reference apparatus — measure deviation, adjust toward standard — particularized by the metacognitive case where the standard is what one can warrant and the adjustment is acknowledgment of gaps.

Epistemic humility is the specific shape calibration takes when confidence is aligned to the actual evidential warrant behind a claim.


Epistemic humility presupposes metacognition because its disciplined matching of confidence to evidential warrant operates as a second-order judgment about one's own cognitive states — "do I actually know this?" "is my reasoning warranted?" It inherits metacognition's commitment to representing, monitoring, evaluating, and regulating one's own cognitive processes, particularized to the epistemic-calibration case where the regulated process is confidence assignment and the quality metric is alignment between expressed and warranted certainty.

Epistemic humility presupposes metacognition because calibrating confidence requires second-order representation and evaluation of one's own knowledge.


Epistemic justice presupposes fairness because its central claim — that epistemic practice can distribute credibility, voice, and interpretive resources justly or unjustly — requires fairness's prior standard of impartial or principled treatment as the evaluative baseline. Without fairness's general apparatus of judging allocations and procedures against defensible standards of equal regard, the diagnoses of testimonial and hermeneutical injustice would lack their normative footing. Epistemic justice inherits fairness's structure of evaluating distributions for principled differentiation and specializes it to the goods of being-heard and being-rendered-intelligible as a knower.

Epistemic justice presupposes fairness because it identifies specific wrongs in the distribution of credibility and interpretive resources.


Epistemic justice presupposes normativity because it treats knowing and being-credited-as-a-knower as goods whose distribution can be just or unjust, and identifies specific wrongs — testimonial and hermeneutical injustice — in which persons are harmed in their capacity as knowers. The framework requires a prior ought-side: a standard against which credibility allocation and interpretive resource distribution can be judged correct, required, or prohibited. Without normativity's general apparatus of evaluation against a standard, the claim that epistemic practice can be unjust would have no traction; epistemic justice imports that apparatus and applies it specifically to epistemic life.

Epistemic justice presupposes normativity because it evaluates knowledge practices against standards of correctness and identifies distinctive wrongs.


An equilibrium is a state with no net change under the system's update rule — a fixed point of the dynamics. Fixed Point supplies the genus: A state a transformation leaves unchanged — self-consistency under update — organizing analysis into existence, uniqueness, stability, and basin of attraction. Equilibrium preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Balanced state. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Discretion is bounded choice delegated to a situated decision-maker where a rule leaves the outcome underdetermined. Equity instantiates that genus: an authorized agent evaluates the circumstances and selects a remedy within the available space rather than mechanically applying the default rule. Equity adds principled fairness, reasonable exception, and remedy-tailoring when strict application would be unjust or inadequate.

Equity is Discretion specialized to fairness-guided exceptions and tailored remedies where rigid rule application would produce an inadequate result.


Equity presupposes fairness because its core operation — supplementing rigid rule-application with discretion calibrated to particular circumstances — is justified by the goal of achieving fair outcomes when strict rule-following would produce unfairness. Without fairness's prior standard of impartial or principled treatment, there is no target equity is correcting toward. Equity inherits fairness's evaluative dimension of just treatment and specializes it to cases where rule-bound application diverges from the underlying standard, supplying the procedural device — case-specific tailoring of remedy — by which the standard is restored when the general rule falls short.

Equity presupposes fairness because the discretion-based tailoring of remedy to circumstance presupposes fairness as the standard the remedy targets.


The rewriting move presupposes and operates under an explicit equivalence relation as a component, but is itself a transformation process, not a relation. Equivalence Relation supplies the prerequisite condition: Groups elements into equivalence classes. Equivalence-Preserving Rewriting operates against that background: Transforming an object into a behaviourally equivalent but operationally different form under an explicit equivalence relation, then selecting among rewrites by an orthogonal cost criterion. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


The MEANING-PRESERVING subclass of transformation: an explicit equivalence relation carves a space of safe moves, plus an orthogonal cost criterion that selects within it. 'this prime is the disciplined subclass... preserved under what relation?' Generic transformation may change meaning freely; this constrains it by a named equivalence. Transformation supplies the genus: A rule-governed mapping that restructures an input into a different output, holding certain invariants fixed while altering others. Equivalence-Preserving Rewriting preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Transforming an object into a behaviourally equivalent but operationally different form under an explicit equivalence relation, then selecting among rewrites by an orthogonal cost criterion. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


The equivalence principle asserts that within a sufficiently small region of spacetime, the free-fall reference frame renders gravity locally undetectable — physics reduces to special relativity in that frame. This claim is intelligible only against the prior machinery of frame of reference: chosen coordinate systems relative to which physical quantities are expressed, with transformation rules between frames. Without that substrate, there would be no free-fall frame to single out as locally inertial and no statement of frame-relative indistinguishability. The frame-of-reference prime supplies the coordinate-system structure the equivalence principle operates on.

The equivalence principle presupposes frame of reference because its claim is the local indistinguishability of gravitational and inertial acceleration across reference frames.


The equivalence principle is a specialization of invariance in which the preserved feature is the local form of physical law and the family of transformations is the choice of free-fall reference frame within a small region of spacetime. It inherits the general invariance commitment that a named feature remains unchanged under a named family of transformations, and specializes by fixing the preserved feature to special-relativistic physics and the transformations to the local-inertial frames that render gravity undetectable as a force, recast as spacetime curvature.

The equivalence principle is a specialization of invariance in which physics is preserved under the local choice of a free-fall frame.


The equivalence principle is a specialization of symmetry. The general pattern is invariance under a specified group of transformations, with the algebraic commitment that the transformation leaves the system unchanged in a specified sense. The equivalence principle instantiates this with the transformation being the choice between an accelerated frame and a free-fall frame in a gravitational field: physics in a sufficiently small region is indistinguishable across the two. The local invariance under frame change is the symmetry; Einstein elevated it to the founding principle of general relativity by deriving spacetime curvature from this exact symmetry requirement.

The equivalence principle is a specific kind of symmetry, the local indistinguishability of gravitational and inertial acceleration.


Equivariance is the relation f(g.x) equals g.f(x), which only makes sense when f is a deterministic rule that assigns each domain element exactly one image — the defining commitment of a Function. Without single-valued dependency between input and output, the equation has no settled meaning and the commutative-square claim cannot be tested. Equivariance therefore presupposes Function as the underlying mathematical object on which the group-action commutation property is imposed.

Equivariance presupposes Function (Mapping): the equivariance property is asserted of a deterministic map between sets carrying group actions.


Equivariance is the property f(g.x) equals g.f(x), so applying the group action before or after the map gives the same result. The preserved feature is the commutative-square relation between the map and the group action, and it is preserved under the named group of transformations. That is precisely the structure of Invariance, with the preserved feature being relational rather than pointwise. Equivariance specializes invariance to maps whose output transforms in lockstep with the input rather than ignoring the action.

Equivariance is a kind of invariance: under a coordinated transformation of input and output, the map's structural relation to the group is preserved.


Equivariance is a specialization of symmetry. Specifically, it instantiates the transformation-group structure by tying two group actions -- one on the input, one on the output -- through a map satisfying f(g.x) = g.f(x). Like every symmetry claim, it specifies a group of transformations and how the system responds; equivariance is the subclass where the response is to transform-in-lockstep rather than to remain fixed (which would be invariance). The map respects the symmetry without being annihilated by it.

Equivariance is a specialization of symmetry that requires the map to commute with the group action rather than be fixed by it.


Equivocation is the dynamic ERROR of using two of a token's senses across a fixity-presuming chain; polysemy (the static multiplicity of senses) is the precondition it exploits. polysemy is 'necessary for equivocation but not sufficient'. Polysemy supplies the prerequisite condition: Multiple meanings. Equivocation operates against that background: A single token is used with two distinct referents at two points in a chain that presumes meaning-fixity, so an apparently sound inference silently fails. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Error proofing engineers the system so that mistaken configurations are made physically impossible to enter or immediately conspicuous when entered, shifting prevention from human vigilance into structure. The design imposes binding restrictions on the admissible set: error states are excluded a priori rather than discouraged. That is the defining structure of a Constraint. Poka-Yoke specializes constraint to operator-error prevention, with the feasibility test embodied in jigs, fixtures, fits, and forcing functions rather than in policy.

Error Proofing is a kind of constraint: the system is designed so that error states are physically inadmissible or immediately detected.


Poka-yoke is the SPECIAL CASE scoped to ACCIDENTAL error by a well-intentioned operator; designed_out_misuse is the general asymmetric-affordance move that is actor-state-independent (works against indifferent or hostile actors too). 'poka-yoke is best understood as the special case of designed-out misuse scoped to accidental error'. Add designed_out_misuse as a parent. Designed-Out Misuse supplies the genus: Affordances and defaults are arranged so the misuse path is costly or impossible while the legitimate path stays easy, preventing harm before enforcement has to act. Error Proofing (Poka-Yoke) preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Error prevention. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


Error proofing is a specialization of fail-safe in which the safe-default discipline is applied specifically at the human-action interface: the system is designed so that a mistaken input is either blocked at the source or unmissable when made. It inherits the general fail-safe commitment that failures will occur and that the post-failure state should be the least harmful available, and specializes by locating the failure mode at human error and engineering the constraint to shift the burden from vigilance to design.

Error proofing is a specialization of fail-safe in which the safe default is achieved by making the unsafe input physically impossible or immediately obvious.


Escalation dominance is one structural feature of how some adversarial competitions settle — credible per-rung advantage along an intensity ladder, resolving below the top by backward induction. 'competition is the broad relation; this is one structural feature.'. Competition supplies the genus: Rivalrous pursuit of a scarce prize where one party's gain is another's loss. Escalation Dominance preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Holding a credible per-rung advantage across a conflict's intensity ladder, so the contest resolves below the top because the disadvantaged party prefers stopping to climbing into a losing position. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Escalation of commitment presupposes decision because the pattern of continuing or increasing investment in a previously-chosen course requires a prior committed choice that closed off alternatives and locked in the path now being doubled down on. Without decision's commitment moment — the collapse of deliberation into a locked-in selection — there is no prior path to be escalated, no sunk cost to entrap reappraisal, and no original decision-maker whose reputation, self-justification, and accountability pressures drive further investment. Decision supplies the commitment that escalation then reinforces in spite of disconfirming evidence.

Escalation of commitment presupposes decision because increasing investment in a previously-chosen course requires a prior committed decision to escalate.


Exception: escalation can be driven chiefly by self-justification, public responsibility, reputational face-saving, institutional budget rules, or strategically structured continuation incentives rather than sunk-cost attachment.

Sunk expenditure is a canonical and frequent substrate for escalation, but it is one component of a broader multi-determinant phenomenon. Self-justification, public responsibility, reputational face-saving, institutional budget inertia, ambiguous delayed returns, or structured continuation incentives can sustain escalation without a strict backward-looking pull from sunk resource magnitude. The relation is therefore typical rather than universal.

Escalation of Commitment is commonly powered by sunk-cost attachment, but its identity also admits independent reputational, accountability, loss-framing, and organizational drivers.


Escape and leakage presupposes containment because the very notion of unintended exit requires a prior boundary across which exit is supposed to be blocked. Containment supplies the bounded perimeter and the integrity discipline against which any departure registers as a failure mode; leakage then names what happens when seams, latent pathways, or layered defenses are penetrated. Without the prior commitment to drawing and maintaining a boundary, there is no pathway-against-design for the Swiss-cheese geometry of escape to expose.

Escape and leakage presupposes containment because exit through unintended pathways only makes sense relative to a defined boundary meant to hold something in.


Escape and leakage presupposes fault tolerance because its diagnostic frame is exactly the one fault tolerance establishes: components and defenses are imperfect, multiple layers of protection are arranged so individual failures do not produce system-level failure, and the structural concern is whether aligned latent failure paths penetrate the layered defenses. Without the prior commitment that systems are designed under the assumption of imperfect components and adverse conditions, leakage as latent-path penetration has no architectural setting in which to register as a tolerated-or-tolerated-no-more event.

Escape and leakage presupposes fault tolerance because its underlying "Swiss-cheese" geometry treats leakage as latent failure paths penetrating layered defenses.


'leakage is one failure mode (wrong-carrier over-permeability), not the whole pattern'; permeability is the general graded-crossing property of which escape_and_leakage is one corner. permeability is the parent. Permeability supplies the genus: A bounded medium selectively passes some carrier through connected pathways. Escape and Leakage preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Constrained quantities exit through unintended pathways. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Essentialism presupposes ontology because the thesis that entities possess defining essences making them what they are is itself a claim within the ontological framework — about which categories are basic, what individuates members of a kind, and what grounds kind-membership across instances. Without the prior apparatus of inventorying basic entity types, supplying identity criteria, and articulating dependency relations, essentialism's modal claim about necessarily-possessed properties has no scaffolding to attach to. Essentialism is a particular ontological stance: it fills in the identity-and-kind-membership slots that ontology leaves open.

Essentialism presupposes ontology because its claims about essences are first-order commitments about what entities and kinds exist and how they are individuated.


Essentialism is reification applied specifically to CATEGORIES (a taxonomy treated as a natural kind); reification generalizes the move across scores, dashboards, maps, models. essentialism is the categorical species. Add reification as a parent. Reification supplies the genus: An abstraction designed to summarise a substrate is treated as the substrate itself, with the audit trail back to the original allowed to atrophy. Essentialism preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Inherent defining properties. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Markedness names the asymmetric structure in which one member of an opposition functions as the unmarked baseline while the other is the marked specified case. Ethnocentrism is the specific shape this pattern takes in the cultural-perception domain: the observer's home cultural framework occupies the unmarked default slot — pre-reflective, treated as normal — while other cultures are processed as marked deviations to be explained, evaluated, or corrected. It is a structurally-particularized instance of marked-unmarked asymmetry whose two terms are one's own culture and all others.

Ethnocentrism is the specific shape markedness takes when one's own culture operates as the unmarked default against which others appear as marked deviations.


Ethnocentrism is the structural condition in which an observer's own cultural framework operates as the unmarked default against which other cultures are perceived as deviations. The whole construction presupposes that the observer has identified with the home culture as an in-group from which a portion of self-concept is derived. Social identity theory supplies exactly that mechanism: people categorize themselves into social groups and bind self-concept to those category memberships. Ethnocentrism is then the outward-judgment consequence that follows when the identified-with culture serves as the cognitive baseline, presupposing social identification as its precondition.

Ethnocentrism presupposes social identity theory because the home-frame centering requires prior identification with a cultural in-group.


DEMOTED domain-specific prime (batch_02 record) whose relocation parent this is: the limnology instance of beneficial-input inversion and hysteretic lock-in. names eutrophication as its canonical case and relocation target. Overshoot and Collapse supplies the genus: An enabling input that is beneficial at low levels crosses an assimilation ceiling and inverts into a self-amplifying degrading load, depleting a secondary resource and locking in a hysteretic worse regime that does not reverse when the input is removed. Eutrophication preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: An enabling input crosses an assimilation ceiling and inverts into a degrading load, driving a self-amplifying bloom that depletes a secondary resource and locks in a worse regime. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


Comparison supplies the relation-reading operation inside every evaluation: the object's relevant feature is co-framed with a threshold, prototype, alternative, rule, purpose, or other criterion so that a relation can be read. Evaluation adds the purpose-relative criterion and an output that counts as a verdict, score, rank, grade, priority, or action-guiding judgment. A comparison can remain descriptive; an evaluation cannot omit the criterion-bearing use.

Evaluation presupposes Comparison because judging an object requires placing its relevant features and a criterion or reference in a shared frame.


A rating is an ORDERED classification in which the order, not the category label, does the load-bearing work — classification PLUS a fixed ordered scale and rater and designed use and compression. A specialization of classification along the order axis. Classification supplies the genus: Sorting entities into discrete categories by explicit rules, turning unbounded variation into a finite, reusable map for downstream reasoning and action. Evaluative Rating preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Compress an evaluative judgment into a position on a shared ordered scale that downstream actors can act on without re-examining the evidence. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


It inherits selective encoding of a target into a structured medium and adds event primacy, participant-time-place-transformation roles, and an append-only historical spine. Representation supplies the genus: Model complex ideas. Event-Centered Modeling preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Making events the primary nodes through which entities, places, and periods are connected, so that everything else is derived as a projection of the event log. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.

Event-centered modeling is representation specialized to schemas in which happenings are primary nodes and entities are derived projections.


Strip hazards, mitigation, emergency response, recovery politics, stakeholders, and phase-specific intervention catalogues. The remaining structure is a determinate state space partitioned into pre-event, event, and post-event conditions, transition relations at onset and termination, and a feedback transition from post-event learning into the next pre-event state. State and State Transition is therefore the portable skeleton being framed, while the child adds normative intervention design and political economy.

Removing hazard-management roles from Event Lifecycle Phases leaves a state-and-transition skeleton with three regimes, onset and termination boundaries, and a return transition from post-event learning to pre-event readiness.


Concurrency raises the reconciliation question; eventual_consistency is 'one discipline for living with the divergence concurrency creates' — accept uncoordinated concurrent writes, diverge, reconcile by merge. Presupposes concurrency. Concurrency supplies the prerequisite condition: Manage simultaneous processes. Eventual Consistency operates against that background: Distributed copies of shared state are allowed to diverge under local updates, with a deterministic merge guaranteeing they reconverge once updates stop. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption.


Probability supplies the genus: Quantifies uncertainty and likelihoods. Eventual Realisation of Possibility preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: In a system subject to many independent trials, every outcome with non-zero per-trial probability eventually occurs, so design posture shifts from per-trial prevention to containment. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.

Eventual Realisation of Possibility is a specialization of Probability, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.


The live evidence identity requires a trace-producing mechanism and a traceable path from event to trace to presentation. Provenance is one of its fixed audit handles: a break supplies a defeater. The inherited record's prose already says provenance is a component of evidence but points the edge from component to whole and encodes part_of under decompose.

Evidence contains provenance as the chain-of-custody relation connecting an underlying event to its observable trace and presentation.


'a TIME-DEPENDENT loss whose magnitude grows with the event-to-capture delay' — a specialization of temporal decay applied to an evidentiary record's attribution structure (vs a static bias). Temporal Decay and Degradation supplies the genus: System properties or capabilities systematically diminish over time. Evidence-Fidelity Decay preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Delay between event and capture lets backfill silently fuse observation, inference, and reconstruction into one uniform record. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


ESS is a perturbation-survival STABILITY CLASSIFICATION of an equilibrium (Lyapunov-style robustness imported into frequency-dependent strategy space) — a specialization of equilibrium. 'a stability classification of one [equilibrium], defined by what happens under perturbation'. Equilibrium supplies the genus: Balanced state. Evolutionarily Stable Strategy preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A population strategy is stable if, once dominant, no rare mutant can invade — equilibrium defined by what survives perturbation, not by ex-ante agreement. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


Prime explicitly states "every ESS is Nash, but not every Nash is an ESS - ESS is the strict refinement" adding a dynamic-stability criterion to Nash. Nash Equilibrium supplies the genus: A strategy profile in which no agent can improve its payoff by unilaterally changing strategy, given the others' choices — the fixed point of the joint best-response correspondence. Evolutionarily Stable Strategy preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A population strategy is stable if, once dominant, no rare mutant can invade — equilibrium defined by what survives perturbation, not by ex-ante agreement. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


Both require a cue, a valued but indirect outcome, a historical coupling, a fast cue-response, a slow meaning-update channel, and persistence after the coupling breaks. The child requires the break to come from environmental change and adds the rate mismatch and cost asymmetry that turn stale cue following into a trap.

Evolutionary trap is cue-outcome decoupling specialized to an environment-driven coupling break outrunning a deeply installed rule's update rate.


Natural Selection supplies the genus: A population of varying, heritable variants is filtered by a selection pressure so that the better-performing variants differentially reproduce or persist, shifting the population's composition over rounds — variation, selection, and retention as a substrate-neutral engine. Evolutionary Trap preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: An agent follows a once-reliable cue more eagerly the stronger it is, straight into harm, because the environment changed and the cue-value coupling broke while the cue-response did not. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.

Evolutionary Trap is typically a specialization of Natural Selection, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.


Exaptation is the structural pattern in which a feature that arose for one function or for none is later co-opted to serve a different function it was not designed for. The construct is meaningful only against the backdrop of adaptation: the original feature was either selected for its prior role or was a by-product of features that were, and the co-option exploits properties already present from that adaptive history. Adaptation supplies the underlying fit-by-internal-modification mechanism that produced the available structures. Exaptation specializes by distinguishing present-utility-without-fresh-selection from current-role-shaped-by-selection.

Exaptation presupposes adaptation because co-opting an existing feature for a new function operates against the background of features shaped by prior adaptive history.


Exaptation is the co-option of a feature built or selected for one function — or for no function at all — into a new functional role it was not designed for, preserving the underlying structural properties while altering what the feature does. That maps onto the Transformation schema: input restructured according to a rule into an output, with certain properties preserved (the structural substrate) and others altered (the functional role). Exaptation specializes transformation to the functional reassignment of a substrate.

Exaptation is a kind of transformation: a feature shaped for one role is restructured into a new functional role without redesign.


The specific regime where two large, concurrently-active opposed channels are differenced at every locus to yield a high-gain output — a specialization of balance (held by co-modulation, not static equilibrium). Balance supplies the genus: Even distribution of elements. Excitation-Inhibition Balance preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Two opposed channels run concurrently and sum at every locus, so the system's output is the difference of two large quantities — high-gain, sharply tunable, and catastrophic to lose either side. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.


'the USE of associative_memory as a categorisation architecture.' Presupposes the recall mechanism, adding a similarity metric and reused response. Associative Memory supplies the prerequisite condition: Content-addressable storage where a cue retrieves linked content. Exemplar Retrieval operates against that background: Answering by reaching for the closest stored case and reusing its response, rather than applying an abstracted rule — the history itself is the model. If the parent condition is removed, the child relation becomes undefined or loses the mechanism asserted by this edge; the parent can obtain independently, so the relation is presupposition rather than subsumption. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


'sharper than generic search — the retrieved item becomes the ANSWER TEMPLATE for a new case.' Exemplar retrieval is search put to work as a categorisation architecture; search_and_retrieval is the genus. Search and Retrieval supplies the genus: Locate and extract information. Exemplar Retrieval preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Answering by reaching for the closest stored case and reusing its response, rather than applying an abstracted rule — the history itself is the model. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The typical qualifier limits the claim to the characteristic route, not a constitutive requirement of every instance; exceptions must retain the child's identity through another mechanism.


Reflexivity supplies the re-entry of a representation into the represented system. This species fixes that representation to an outcome expectation or learned prediction, requires a response channel, and requires a signable counterfactual change in the target outcome.

Expectancy-mediated outcome is reflexivity specialized to a representation that predicts an outcome and causally changes realization of that same outcome.


Expectation violation is baseline deviation specialized to an active predictive reference and a registered violation response. Both pair a realization with a legible reference and make the departure a first-class result. The reference must be actively predictive, the realization must breach it, and the breach must trigger surprise, reorientation, model revision, or repair.


Expected utility applies the expectation operator to a utility function rather than to the raw outcome, adding a preference representation and a risky-choice ranking role. Expected value also averages physical, statistical, financial, and computational quantities with no utility or decision frame.

Expected utility is expected value specialized to a utility-transformed outcome used to rank risky prospects.


Expected utility presupposes preference because the operation collapses an uncertain prospect into a single comparable scalar by probability-weighting the utility of each outcome — and that utility function is the agent's preference ordering over outcomes made cardinal under the von Neumann–Morgenstern axioms. Without preference as the underlying ordering on the choice set, there is no value function to weight, no ranking to maximize, and no meaning to "prefer the certain over the uncertain." Preference supplies the ordering primitive; expected utility supplies the aggregation rule that turns it into choice under risk.

Expected utility presupposes preference because probability-weighted aggregation requires a prior utility function ranking outcomes.


Expected value inherits Aggregation's many-to-one collapse and adds a probability measure, a numerical random quantity, and the linear weighting rule that produces the distribution's first moment. Sums, maxima, votes, and medians are aggregations without this differentia.

Expected value is aggregation specialized to collapsing a probability distribution by a probability-weighted linear average.


Without a probability space and measure there are no coherent outcome weights, no random quantity defined almost everywhere, and no expectation operator to evaluate. Probability is a prerequisite rather than a species of expectation.

Expected value presupposes a probability measure against which the random quantity can be integrated or summed.


Experimental design is the specific shape comparison takes when it becomes an active, intervention-based architecture for causal inference. Comparison's general anatomy — comparands, shared frame, alignment rule, output relation — is structurally particularized into treatment and control conditions as comparands, randomization and blocking as the alignment rules that make them commensurable, and an effect estimate as the output. The general operation of placing items under a shared frame is preserved; the specific shape is its principled deployment to isolate causal effects from confounding through assignment under explicit constraints.

Experimental design is the specific shape comparison takes when it becomes a controlled, intervention-based architecture for causal inference.


Valid designs may use within-subject, factorial, historical, synthetic, or model-based contrasts without a separately designated control sample.

When a control sample is used, it is an internal comparator in the experimental architecture rather than a whole containing the design. Its match to the focal sample and shared measurement turn their difference into the identifying contrast. The relation is typical because valid designs can use within-subject, factorial, historical, synthetic, or model-based contrasts without a separately designated control sample.

Experimental Design typically contains a Control Sample as the matched baseline arm whose contrast isolates the tested factor.


Technical Debt supplies the genus: A present expedient choice imposes a future cost that compounds with system growth until it is paid down, with a principal, an interest payment, and a pay-down. Explanatory Overlay Masking Structural Debt preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: An artefact carrying avoidable structural confusion is patched with an informational overlay that makes it locally readable without retiring the underlying problem, and the overlay's local sufficiency quietly crowds out the structural fix that would actually resolve it. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association.

Explanatory Overlay Masking Structural Debt is a specialization of Technical Debt, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.