Scarcity is the specific shape constraint takes when the binding restriction is finite supply relative to competing demands on a resource.

Constraint is a condition that restricts admissible configurations or allocations to those satisfying it, defining the feasible set as a first-class object. Scarcity is the particular shape this pattern takes for resources: the available quantity is insufficient to satisfy all simultaneous demands, so allocating to one use necessarily denies it to another. The supply-demand mismatch becomes the binding restriction on admissible allocations. A structurally-particularized instance of constraint whose specific source is the finite-supply-versus-competing-demand relation that makes the question of who gets what arise at all.


Scenario planning is a specific foresight method that constructs a small set of internally consistent stories spanning critical uncertainties.

Scenario planning is a specialization of foresight whose distinctive move is building a small set of three to five internally consistent, structurally distinct futures by systematically varying the most critical and uncertain driving forces. It inherits foresight's commitment to structured anticipation of plural possible futures informing present perception and choice, and adds the specific architecture of a 2×2 matrix of key uncertainties and qualitatively different narrative trajectories — supplying the central narrative-stress-testing component of the broader foresight methods stack.


Scenario planning is the specific shape modal reasoning takes when alternative futures are constructed as a small set of plausible, structurally distinct stories.

Scenario planning is the specific shape modal reasoning takes when the alternative possibilities reasoned over are a small set of internally consistent future trajectories, each constructed by varying the most critical and uncertain driving forces shaping the decision environment. It is a structurally-particularized instance of evaluating claims across a structured space of possibilities, with the added commitments that the modal space is bounded to a handful of qualitatively different stories rather than infinite worlds, the construction is driven by critical-uncertainty axes, and the output is a strategy stress-tested for robustness across the scenarios it spans.


Scheduling is a kind of optimization: it assigns tasks to time slots and resources to minimize cost or maximize throughput under constraints.

Scheduling assigns tasks to time slots and resources subject to precedence, deadline, and capacity constraints while optimizing an objective such as makespan, lateness, or utilization. That fits the optimization triplet exactly: decision variables (assignments), an objective (the cost or throughput criterion), and constraints (precedence, deadlines, capacity). Scheduling is the specialization of optimization in which the decision space is the assignment of work over a temporal-and-resource lattice.


Scheduling presupposes prioritization because assigning tasks to time slots under constraints requires a ranking when items compete for the same resource.

Scheduling presupposes prioritization because whenever multiple tasks compete for a limited resource at a given moment, the scheduler must order them, and that ordering is precisely a prioritization: a ranking of competing claims by some criterion of value, urgency, or feasibility. Prioritization supplies the general apparatus of ranking and committing to that ranking when resources are scarce; scheduling adds the additional structure of mapping the ranked items to time slots and respecting precedence, deadlines, and capacity constraints. Without prior ranking, scheduling has no tiebreaker.


Scheduling is a specialization of allocation in which the limited resources include time slots and assignments must honor precedence and deadlines.

Scheduling is a specialization of allocation. The general allocation pattern assigns limited supply across competing claims under feasibility and criterion. Scheduling specializes by including time as a key dimension of the limited resource: tasks are assigned to time slots and resources subject to precedence, deadlines, and capacity, optimizing makespan, lateness, or throughput. The same assignment-under-scarcity logic of allocation applies, with time slots as the additional structural feature and ordering-over-time as the central decision variable distinguishing scheduling from pure resource division.


A schema is the specific shape abstraction takes when experience with a category is retained as a type-level pattern with slots.

A schema is the structurally-particularized form abstraction takes in the cognitive-representation case: the concrete original is the population of category instances encountered, the purpose is efficient recognition and prediction of novel-but-familiar situations, and the projection retains typical features and variable roles while dropping idiosyncratic detail. It satisfies abstraction's three-part specification — concrete original, purpose, projection — particularized by the slot-and-filler structure that enables top-down processing of incoming data.


A schema-bounded blind spot requires a schema whose finite prompts or categories determine which cases can be generated for consideration.

Schema supplies the finite organizing and eliciting structure. The child adds the open target space, the consequential case outside the schema's expressive coverage, and the false-completeness effect created by diligent use within it.


A schema-bounded blind spot exists only relative to an intended coverage claim connecting elicitation prompts or categories to the cases that should be surfaced.

Coverage / Reachability supplies a source set, a required-target set, and the obligation that every target be reached. Schema-Bounded Blind Spot adds the deeper failure in which the finite schema helps define the visible target set, leaving an out-of-schema case absent from the very audit that would reveal the gap.


A coverage boundary separating cases expressible inside the schema from cases it cannot generate is an internal constituent of the blind spot.

The pattern requires an inside and outside: cases for which the schema has a prompt, category, or slot, and cases it cannot express. Boundary supplies that demarcation; the child adds systematic non-elicitation outside it and the false-completeness effect produced by exhaustive work inside it.


Scope Creep is a specialization of Ratchet Effect, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Ratchet Effect supplies the genus: Direction-asymmetric coupling plus a locking element produces accumulating one-way displacement under bidirectional forcing. Scope Creep preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A perimeter ratchets outward through small additions each judged against a drifting current baseline rather than the original charter, with no owner of the trajectory. 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.


Screening presupposes information asymmetry because the menu-design strategy it names is a response to unequal private knowledge held by the other side.

Screening presupposes information asymmetry because its entire structure is a response to an unobservable type held by the agent: the uninformed party designs a menu of contracts such that agents of different types self-select, revealing the hidden information through choice rather than through verification. Without the prior distributional fact that one side knows something material the other cannot observe, there would be no need for self-selection mechanics. Screening inherits information asymmetry's structure of unequal private knowledge and supplies one of the canonical mechanisms — menu-based separation — by which the uninformed side recovers what it cannot directly see.


Screening is a specialization of mechanism design in which the designer is the uninformed party building a menu to elicit hidden types through self-selection.

Screening is a specialization of mechanism design in which the designer is the uninformed party facing agents of unknown type, and the desired outcome is type-revelation through self-selection. It inherits mechanism design's general inversion — start with the target equilibrium, search for rules implementing it under private information and self-interest — and specializes by fixing the rule class to menus of contracts and the objective to separating types. The participants' best responses, calibrated by their hidden types, deliver the information the designer needs without direct verification.


A script is 'the specifically temporally-and-causally ordered SCHEMA'; a schema is the generic slot-and-filler bundle that may or may not be ordered. Script inherits schema's slot machinery and adds ordered sequence and breach-on-next-step. Genus=schema. Schema supplies the genus: Structured knowledge framework. Script preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A stored representation of a familiar situation as a temporally and causally ordered sequence of events with role-slots, props, and conditions, against which encounters are interpreted and deviations detected as breaches. 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.


Search and retrieval presupposes a problem space because locating items requires a representation specifying states, operators, and goal criteria.

Search and retrieval presupposes a problem space because navigating from a query toward relevant items requires a formal representation that specifies what counts as a state, what operators move between states, and what counts as reaching the goal of matching the query. Without problem-space machinery — initial state, goal state, operators, intermediate-state lattice — there is no structured space to navigate, no precision-recall trade-off to manage, and no notion of search efficiency. Problem space supplies the representational substrate on which search and retrieval algorithms operate.


Search and retrieval presupposes trade-offs because every retrieval system must balance precision, recall, and latency against each other.

Search and retrieval is the process of locating relevant items from a larger set, navigating a space to match a query. Every realistic retrieval system faces structurally coupled valued dimensions — precision (excluding false positives), recall (capturing true positives), and query latency — that cannot all be maximized at once. Trade-offs supplies the structural pattern in which improving one valued dimension worsens another within a feasible set; retrieval design presupposes this multi-dimensional coupling as the standing condition that any indexing, ranking, or pruning choice must navigate.


Second-order cybernetics is the specific shape reflexivity takes when the observer is included as a participant in the system being observed.

Second-order cybernetics is the structurally-particularized form reflexivity takes when the observation apparatus itself is treated as part of the system: the observer's models of the system, and of their own observing, become inputs that shape the system's dynamics. It inherits reflexivity's structural pattern — a system's representations of itself shape its behavior — particularized to the cybernetic case where the system under regulation explicitly includes the regulator-observer coupling as a first-class analytical concern.


A design-stage failure: lifting a load-bearing constraint that was a silent prioritizer floods the successor with a postponed-ambitions stockpile. Presupposes a feasibility-constrained design process. Design for Implementation supplies the prerequisite condition: Real-world feasibility. Second-System Effect operates against that background: When load-bearing constraints are lifted but capability is retained, a stockpile of postponed ambitions floods the successor, producing overengineering. 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.


Segmentation and boundary drawing presupposes classification because partitioning a continuous domain into discrete categories requires a category structure to draw boundaries within.

Segmentation and boundary drawing presupposes classification because the work of partitioning a continuous domain — placing boundaries that decide where one category ends and another begins — only makes sense relative to a category structure being assigned. Classification supplies the deliberate process of sorting items into discrete categories according to defined rules; segmentation supplies the upstream operation of placing the boundaries themselves within a continuous substrate. Without classification's category-structured target, there would be nothing for the boundary placements to be boundaries between, and small boundary shifts would not propagate into changed classification outcomes.


Segmentation and boundary drawing is the specific shape boundary takes when a continuous domain is partitioned into discrete categories by boundary placement.

Segmentation and boundary drawing is the particularization of boundary to the act of partitioning: a continuous domain is divided into discrete categories by placing boundaries that determine what is treated as the same versus different. Where boundary names the conceptual demarcation between an entity and its outside generally, segmentation fixes the operation — partitioning a continuum — and emphasizes the design-choice character of where the lines fall, with small boundary shifts producing large changes in category assignment.


Selection bias presupposes statistical inference because it names a distortion in the very inferential move from sample to population.

Selection bias presupposes statistical inference because the bias it names is a distortion of the inference from sample to population: associations observed in a recorded sample may misrepresent the target population when entry, retention, or measurement is itself associated with exposure and outcome. Without the prior commitment that finite samples are being used to draw conclusions about an underlying population or mechanism, there is no inferential move for selection to bias. The concept is parasitic on the inferential frame whose validity it threatens.


Selection bias is a specialization of bias in which the distortion arises from how units enter, remain in, or contribute data.

Selection bias is a specialization of bias. Specifically, it instantiates the systematic-displacement-from-the-true-value pattern by locating the mechanism in the unit-selection process: when entry, retention, or data-contribution is associated with both exposure and outcome (self-selection, survivorship, conditioning on a collider), the resulting estimate is offset in a consistent direction that more data does not erase. It exhibits bias's defining signature -- a sign and direction surviving the infinite-sample limit -- with the offset traced to selection rather than measurement or estimation.


Selection Bias is a specialization of Vantage-Induced Omission, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Vantage-Induced Omission supplies the genus: An apparatus's structural vantage makes some regions of a landscape reachable and others constitutively invisible, so its output is mistaken for the landscape rather than the landscape-restricted-to-its-vantage. Selection Bias preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Skewed sampling. 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.


Selection on Noisy Estimates is selection bias specialized to inclusion or choice driven by an extreme noisy proxy for latent value.

Inclusion makes the observed set unrepresentative because it depends on a result-bearing variable. The differentia is that the variable is a noisy estimate of latent value, the selector favors a tail, and the distortion is a conditional shift in estimation error.


A selection-visibility gate is natural selection specialized by an upstream access stage that determines which variant consequences the selector can act on. Both begin with a population of variants and change its composition through differential persistence or reproduction under a selection pressure. The child additionally requires a variable expression or accessibility gate upstream of selection and a retained-record bias traceable to that gate.


An EXACT, residual-free specialization of decomposition: a weighted-mean change split identically into covariance-of-weight-with-trait (selection) and share-weighted within-unit change (transmission).

An EXACT, residual-free specialization of decomposition: a weighted-mean change split identically into covariance-of-weight-with-trait (selection) + share-weighted within-unit change (transmission). The Price equation is its generator; FHK and Brinson are the same identity for firms/portfolios. Dossier-confirmed specialization edge.


The identity presupposes linear combination because its population mean and within-unit term are weighted sums over units.

The object being decomposed is a weighted mean, and the transmission term is itself a weight-indexed sum of within-unit changes. Without scaling unit values by weights and adding them, neither side of the residual-free identity is defined.


Covariance of unit weight with trait is the exact selection term contained in the residual-free decomposition.

The Price-equation identity contains covariance of relative weight or fitness with trait value as its first summand. Removing that constituent removes the selection half of the selection-versus-transmission split rather than merely removing a prerequisite used to calculate it.


Selective propagation is a propagation subtype that adds attribute-dependent survival and downstream composition shift to ordinary source-through-medium spread. Both require movement from a source through a medium whose structure governs paths, attenuation, and reach. Selective propagation additionally requires a heterogeneous input and a component-property-to-survival rule that changes the mixture with distance.


Self-control presupposes temporal inconsistency because the override capacity self-control names exists to resolve conflicts between near and far valuations.

Self-control presupposes temporal inconsistency because the conflict it resolves — between a salient present-oriented impulse and a slower future-oriented evaluation — is constituted by the prior structural pattern in which an agent's preference ordering reverses as the decision horizon approaches. Without that gap between distant-self and near-self valuations of the same action, there would be no impulse to override and no higher-order standard to enforce. Self-control inherits the temporal-inconsistency structure and supplies the intra-agent machinery — attention, commitment devices, depletable override capacity — that lets the represented goal win over the felt impulse.


Self_control is 'one SUBSTRATE of the gap (the individual-cognitive transmission weakness of hyperbolic discounting)'; the knowledge-action gap is the broader structure that scales from akrasia to collective implementation gaps. Knowledge-Action Gap supplies the genus: An agent holds accurate knowledge of the appropriate action, sincerely intends to take it, and systematically does not — because knowing and doing are separable load-bearing states and intervention on the knowing channel does not, by itself, change the doing channel. Self Control preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Overriding immediate impulses in service of longer-term goals. 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.


Self-Defeating Prediction presupposes Feedback, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Feedback supplies the prerequisite condition: Outputs influence inputs. Self-Defeating Prediction operates against that background: Belief in a forecast moves conditions against it. 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.


Self-Defeating Prediction is the negative collective-action species in which response to a disseminated forecast moves the predicted variable against it.

The child fixes the predictive state to a disseminated forecast, the response channel to aggregated belief-driven action, and the coupling sign to a reduction in the forecast's truth value.


Self_efficacy is an agent's second-order belief about its OWN capacity to act — presupposes the first-order agency triad. Agency supplies the prerequisite condition: A system pursues representable goals through actions whose selection is sensitive to its beliefs about its situation, via a goal-representation, world-model, and action-selection coupling. Self-Efficacy operates against that background: Belief in capability. 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 architecture presupposes a self/other classifier as one obligatory role; the prime is the consequence when that classifier gates a harm-producing effector over shared machinery. Presupposes classification (one role, not the whole).


Self-Fulfilling Prophecy is the positive behavioral species in which an expectation changes action so the expected proposition validates itself.

Both require an outcome-relevant predictive state, a causal response channel, and a realized outcome that differs because the prediction entered the system. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy fixes the channel to behavior by the holder or recipients, the coupling sign to positive, and the result to validation of the predicted proposition.


A self-fulfilling prophecy is the specific shape feedback takes when a belief's expression alters behavior so that the belief is validated.

A self-fulfilling prophecy is the specific shape feedback takes when the looped variable is a prediction or expectation about an outcome and the return path runs through the behavior of the people who hold or hear the prediction. The prediction's expression alters action, action alters the outcome, and the outcome confirms the prediction — closing the loop. It is a structurally-particularized instance of output routed back to influence subsequent input, with the added specification that the looped quantity is a belief about the future and the coupling sign is positive enough to drive the world toward the predicted state.


Self-handicapping presupposes self-efficacy because the strategy only triggers in agents with fragile task-specific ability beliefs to protect.

Self-handicapping is a pre-emptive self-protective behavior aimed at shielding self-assessed ability from disconfirmation by creating an external explanation for possible failure. The strategy presupposes a self-efficacy belief in place — specifically a fragile one — because there must be a task-specific capability estimate at stake for the handicap to defend. Without an antecedent agency expectation that could be downgraded by poor performance, there is nothing for the attribution shield to protect; self-efficacy supplies the belief variable that self-handicapping mobilizes against evaluative threat.


Self-handicapping is the specific shape responsibility attribution takes when an agent pre-arranges an external excuse to shield ability from blame.

Responsibility attribution is the directed assignment from outcomes to responsible sources, gated by counterfactual and normative tests. Self-handicapping is the particular shape this operation takes when an agent strategically engineers the attribution in advance: by introducing a performance-degrading obstacle before the task, the agent ensures that any failure attribution will land on the obstacle rather than on ability. It is a structurally-particularized instance of attribution whose specific machinery is pre-emptive cause-planting to redirect the post-hoc assignment away from internal capability.


Self-organized criticality is criticality specialized to systems whose internal dynamics drive and maintain the critical regime without external tuning. Criticality supplies the genus: Regime poised at a phase boundary where response becomes scale-free and correlations diverge. Self-Organized Criticality preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Localized chaos and fluctuation at fine scales actively sustains and enables emergent coherence and order at coarse scales through recursive multi-scale feedback, rather than degrading 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.


A Semigroup strictly contains Associativity as the axiom certifying that every finite product is independent of parenthesization.

The formal species adds a carrier, operation, algebraic tier, embeddings, decomposition theory, and classification machinery. Associativity remains the internal portable property from which its re-association payoff follows.


A Semigroup strictly contains Closure because combining any two carrier elements must return another element of that same carrier.

Closure supplies output containment and iterability; associativity separately supplies regrouping invariance. The semigroup species requires both and adds algebra-specific theory neither property carries alone. Closure supplies an internal constituent: Ensures operations remain within a set. Semigroup requires that role within this mechanism: The minimal algebraic species — a set with one closed, associative binary operation and nothing more — whose lone axiom certifies that any finite product is parenthesization-independent, so a sequential reduction can be split, reassociated, and run in parallel without changing the answer. 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.


A Semigroup is a Set equipped with one closed associative binary operation.

The carrier and bivalent membership relation remain exactly those of Set and Membership. The operation and its axioms add structure without changing the fact that every semigroup is first a set of elements.


Sensemaking is a specialization of interpretation in which agents facing ambiguity actively construct a working account of what is happening.

Sensemaking is a kind of interpretation specialized to ambiguous, surprising, or rapidly-unfolding situations: the interpreter extracts and brackets cues from an overwhelming stream, organizes them into a plausible identity-grounded narrative, and commits to a working frame that enables action. It inherits interpretation's commitment to producing constrained readings from a representational substrate within a framework, and supplies the specific case where the substrate is unfolding events under uncertainty and the constraint of action-readiness substitutes for the academic luxury of multiple consistent readings.


Sensemaking presupposes framing because the plausible account it constructs is built by selecting and configuring cues into a working frame.

Sensemaking works by extracting and bracketing cues from an ambiguous stream and committing to a plausible interpretation that enables action. That commitment is precisely a frame: a selective configuration of what is foregrounded, what reference point is taken, and what vocabulary organizes the situation. Framing names the general structural fact that any presentation of a situation selects and configures information; sensemaking is the active social-cognitive process that mobilizes this framing capability under pressure of ambiguity, so it cannot operate without framing as its underlying mechanism.


Sensemaking commonly contributes the live construction of Narrative, but some working interpretations organize cues through non-story representational forms.

Sensemaking often constructs a plausible story by selecting cues and connecting events into a causal-temporal account that enables action, so it commonly contributes the live construction of a narrative. But a working interpretation can instead take the form of a map, category system, causal diagram, matrix, or other non-story model. Narrative is therefore a frequent containing product of sensemaking rather than a universal one.


Sensitivity analysis in operations research presupposes optimization because shadow prices and parameter ranges characterize how an optimum responds to input perturbations.

Sensitivity analysis in operations research presupposes optimization because its outputs -- shadow prices, reduced costs, ranges of optimal-basis stability, break-even values -- are defined relative to an existing optimum produced by solving an optimization problem. Without optimization's quartet of decision variables, objective, constraints, and notion of optimality, there is no optimal solution to perturb and no dual structure (shadow prices ARE the constraint duals) to interrogate. Sensitivity analysis is the post-optimality interrogation that optimization makes possible.


Separation of powers presupposes boundary because it requires demarcated jurisdictional lines between branches that govern reach and crossing.

Separation of powers presupposes boundary because the doctrine operationally requires demarcation lines between branches — legislative, executive, judicial — that specify what belongs inside each branch's authority and what crosses into another's. It inherits boundary's four-part structure: the bounded entity (each branch's jurisdiction), the demarcation criterion (constitutional assignment of powers), the permeability (checks-and-balances crossings), and the operative force (acts beyond jurisdiction are void). Without boundary's demarcation apparatus, the structural separation cannot be drawn.


Separation of powers presupposes authority because it operates by distributing legitimate binding-decision power across distinct branches.

Separation of powers presupposes authority because what is being separated is precisely the capacity to make binding decisions that create persistent obligations — Weber's Herrschaft. It inherits authority's commitment that legitimate power rests on recognition rather than raw capacity, particularized to the distributive case where the right to decide is partitioned among branches so that no single agent holds the full bundle. Without prior authority to apportion, there is nothing to separate; the doctrine is an architecture for authority's controlled distribution.


Separation of powers is a specialization of modularity in which governmental functions are decomposed into independent branches with defined interfaces.

Separation of powers is a specialization of modularity. The general modularity pattern decomposes a system into discrete, largely self-contained components with stable interfaces, reducing coupling and increasing cohesion so each module can be understood and revised independently. Separation of powers applies this architecture to governance: legislative, executive, and judicial functions are partitioned into branches with defined interfaces (lawmaking, enforcement, adjudication) and independence of operation. The same decomposition-with-stable-interfaces logic of modularity applies, with governmental function as the specific axis of partition and checks-and-balances as the specific interface contract.


Sequencing presupposes dependency because the order in which steps are arranged is dictated by which steps require which others as prerequisites.

Sequencing presupposes dependency because the deliberate arrangement of steps over time is constrained by directed relations: step B cannot proceed until step A is supplied. It inherits dependency's structural asymmetry — A relies on B being prior — and uses it as the binding constraint that determines admissible orderings. The active design choice of sequencing operates on a dependency graph, and without that graph there would be no precedence to satisfy and no value in the order itself.


Sequencing is a kind of optimization that searches for the order of steps that maximizes value subject to precedence constraints.

Sequencing is a specialization of optimization: it searches the space of admissible orderings of tasks for the arrangement that maximizes or minimizes a stated objective (makespan, throughput, value-extraction) under precedence and resource constraints. It inherits optimization's four-part triplet plus optimality sense — decision variables (the order), objective, constraints (precedences), and notion of optimality — particularized to the temporal-arrangement case. Pinedo's canonical treatment is precisely an optimization problem class.


Sequencing presupposes time because the deliberate arrangement of steps to produce value requires an underlying earlier-to-later ordering of events.

Sequencing is the active design problem of arranging steps so their order produces measurable value, satisfying precedence and resource constraints. The very notion of an arrangement that runs from before to after requires a dimension along which events can be ordered with irreversible succession — exactly what time supplies. Without time's earlier-later ordering and arrow, there would be no succession to design, no prerequisites to honor, and no critical path to optimize. Sequencing operates as a deliberate choice over the substrate that time provides.


Every sequestration is containment organized for deliberate removal from active circulation and persistent isolation.

Every sequestration keeps an item within maintained bounds so that unwanted exchange with the surrounding system is prevented or tightly gated, satisfying Containment. Sequestration adds a narrower purpose and operating commitment: the item is deliberately removed from normal circulation, and the isolation is intended to persist. Generic containment need not remove its contents from an interaction network or make them unavailable. Boundary is inherited through Containment rather than repeated as a flattened direct head.


A serial local optimization failure contains a pipeline because its locally optimizing stages must be arranged in an ordered chain whose outputs or decisions become the next stage's conditions.

Pipeline supplies the ordered stage-to-stage structure. The failure is not merely several optimizers acting at once: each stage receives a condition shaped by another stage and passes a changed condition onward, allowing local deviations to accumulate through the chain.


A serial local optimization failure contains optimization because every stage selects what is best for its own scoped objective rather than making an arbitrary or mistaken choice.

Optimization supplies the objective, choice variables, and local best-response at each stage. The characteristic loss arises even when every local decision is rational and competently solved; the defect lies in how those scoped optima compose, not in failure to optimize locally.


Serialization presupposes Transformation, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Transformation supplies the prerequisite condition: A rule-governed mapping that restructures an input into a different output, holding certain invariants fixed while altering others. Serialization operates against that background: Convert structured content into a flat, transportable form that reconstructs. 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.


Severed accountability presupposes an accountability relation as the reference architecture whose effective principal-to-agent leverage a bypassing revenue channel disables.

The pattern requires an agent, a principal or constituency to whom the agent is answerable in role, and a counterfactual channel through which that principal would ordinarily impose consequences. Unearned revenue bypasses that channel and makes the answerability relation ineffective. The resulting configuration is therefore built against accountability as its reference architecture, but it is not a species of working accountability: it names the structural disabling of accountability's consequence-bearing leverage.


Sharding assigns a load across disjoint parallel owners by a stable key-to-shard function — a specialized allocation with a deterministic, routable-without-fan-out partition rule. Allocation supplies the genus: Assign a limited supply across competing claimants under a feasibility constraint, independent of which criterion fills in the rule. Sharding preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Partition a load across owners by a stable key-to-shard function. 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.


Shared-Interface Constraint Conflict is the Interface Mismatch species in which one offered output cannot satisfy the mutually incompatible contracts of several receivers sharing the seam.

Interface Mismatch supplies two or more locally coherent sides, a required exchange seam, and failure caused by offered and required contracts that do not align. Shared-Interface Constraint Conflict inherits that structure and adds one undifferentiated output, several receivers, and an empty intersection among their binding acceptance sets.


Mutually unsatisfiable receiver constraints are internal constituents of the conflict rather than optional background conditions.

Each receiver supplies at least one binding acceptance condition, and the joint feasible set is empty: no available output satisfies every receiver at once. The constraint sets and their empty intersection are therefore constituents of the pattern.


The EXTERNALISED sibling of a private mental_model — externalisation relocates the model's locus into a jointly-maintained artefact, buying durability/queryability/versioning a private model lacks. mental_model is the genus; shared_mental_model is the more-specific child. Mental Model supplies the genus: Internal system representation. Shared Mental Model preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A jointly maintained external artefact anchoring distributed reasoning. 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 Shirky principle names 'one specific and recurrent failure of incentive compatibility' — survival coupled to problem-PRESENCE rather than reduction. It presupposes the incentive-alignment frame and names the misalignment its remedies restore. Incentive Compatibility supplies the prerequisite condition: Align incentives. Shirky Principle operates against that background: An entity created to solve a problem develops a survival interest in the problem's persistence when its resources are coupled to the problem's measured presence. 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.


Shortcut Learning presupposes Learning, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Learning supplies the prerequisite condition: Durable, experience-driven update of an agent's internal state that carries forward to alter later behavior or prediction. Shortcut Learning operates against that background: An adapting system replaces the structure it was meant to learn with a cheaper incidental feature that correlates with success on its training distribution, and collapses sharply once that correlation breaks. 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.


Asserts the is a specialization of directly: "a side channel is specifically the SUBSET of side effects that carry a function of protected state to a measuring observer." side_channel_attack is the informational/ adversarial species of side_effect (the unintended-consequence genus). Medium (not high) because the framed adversarial overlay (SF 0.7) adds real content beyond bare side_effect, but the subset relation is explicit and file-asserted. Other cross-refs (control_data_channel_confusion, hidden_information_reconstruction) are lateral, not parents. Side Effect supplies the genus: An action's change to shared state beyond its declared interface. Side Channel Attack preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A system's legitimate outputs reveal information its access policy meant to protect, via observable consequences the policy never enumerated. 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.


Side Effect presupposes Interface, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Interface supplies the prerequisite condition: A bounded, rule-governed surface across which two systems exchange information or control while hiding their internals, letting each evolve independently behind a stable contract. Side Effect operates against that background: An action's change to shared state beyond its declared interface. 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.


Signal decay and fadeout presupposes dissipation because the systematic weakening of signals is the local manifestation of irreversible energy degradation.

Signal decay and fadeout presupposes dissipation because the systematic weakening of a signal or influence over time and distance is the surface manifestation of underlying dissipative processes: friction, viscosity, resistance, absorption, scattering, radiative loss. Without dissipation's prior structure of irreversible transformation of organized energy into thermalized form through interactions with many degrees of freedom, there would be no mechanism for signal attenuation. Signal decay inherits the dissipation framework and specializes it to the case where the degraded quantity is a propagating signal, producing the characteristic exponential, power-law, or geometric attenuation laws across domains.


Signal Detection Theory presupposes Type I & Type II Errors, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

The 2x2 outcome matrix is the type-I/type-II framework (false alarms = type I, misses = type II); SDT ADDS the generative model (two overlapping evidence distributions) that factorizes the error trade-off into a sensitivity fixing the ROC and a criterion distributing errors along it. Built on the error-types pair. Type I & Type II Errors supplies the prerequisite condition: False positive/negative. Signal Detection Theory operates against that background: Every decision under noise factorizes into a sensitivity that fixes the achievable error trade-off and a freely-chosen criterion that distributes errors along it. 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.


Signal devaluation presupposes a signaling arrangement whose initially discriminating marker can lose its separating value as issuance expands and recipients adapt.

The child requires a signal that recipients use as evidence about an underlying type, an issuance process that controls its effective cost or scarcity, and an initially informative separation that can collapse. Signaling supplies that reference mechanism. Signal devaluation is not itself the sender's information-revealing action; it is the dynamic failure of that action's evidentiary value under elastic issuance and adaptive interpretation.


Signal devaluation is temporal degradation specialized to the systematic loss of a marker's informativeness while its nominal form remains intact.

It inherits the genus's systematic diminishment of a system capability over elapsed time: here the capability is a signal's power to discriminate underlying types. The child adds an issuer with elastic supply, demand-side pressure, adaptive recipient expectations, an expansion-and-reanchoring ratchet, and eventual separating-equilibrium collapse while the nominal marker remains unchanged.


Signal inflation requires repeated signaling through a receiver-facing channel whose credibility can be depleted by overuse. Signaling supplies the prerequisite condition: Revealing hidden information. Signal Inflation operates against that background: A sender over-fires a channel and depletes a finite, slow-regenerating receiver-side credibility budget, so the next true message lands on an audience that has rationally stopped responding. 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.


Signaling presupposes information asymmetry because the costly observable action it names is the informed party's response to the other side's inability to verify.

Signaling presupposes information asymmetry because the costly observable action it names — education, warranties, dividends, costly displays — only makes sense as a device for transmitting information the receiver cannot directly verify. Without the prior distributional fact that one side knows something material the other does not, there would be nothing to signal. Signaling inherits information asymmetry's structure and supplies the canonical mechanism by which the informed side closes the gap: choosing an action whose cost is differentially borne by types, so that only the high-quality type finds the signal worthwhile and a separating equilibrium emerges.


Signature-Borne Provenance is the intrinsic species of Provenance in which the artifact carries evidence of its origin without an external custody chain.

Provenance covers ways of establishing where an entity came from and how its present state relates to that origin. Signature-Borne Provenance specializes this genus to the intrinsic case: a formation-imprinted property survives transport and is read backward through a signature library. External ledgers and custody links can establish Provenance without any carried signature, so the signature-borne mechanism is a proper species rather than a synonym.


Signature-Borne Provenance presupposes conservation or slow-enough invariance of the carried property.

Without a property conserved over the operational transport timescale, the present signature cannot be mapped backward to formation context independently of a custody chain. Conservation Laws supplies the prerequisite condition: Quantities remain constant. Signature-Borne Provenance operates against that background: A conservative property carries origin through transport, read back without a custody chain. 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.


Signature-Borne Provenance presupposes flow to transport a signed parcel away from its formation context.

Without movement through a carrier or medium, the signature does not preserve origin across changing location and the downstream backward-inference problem does not arise. Flow supplies the prerequisite condition: Structured movement of energy, matter, or information. Signature-Borne Provenance operates against that background: A conservative property carries origin through transport, read back without a custody chain. 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.


's defining boundary: an affordance is what the world makes POSSIBLE; a signifier makes the affordance PERCEIVABLE. The signifier presupposes a latent affordance to advertise (they fail independently). Affordance supplies the prerequisite condition: An action possibility offered by the fit between an agent and its environment. Signifier operates against that background: A perceptible cue placed on or near an action possibility so the possibility is recognized in time to be used—what makes an affordance perceivable, not what makes it possible. 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.


Signaling advertises ANYTHING (quality, identity, status); a signifier narrows this to advertising 'what can or should be done, here, now, by this perceiver' at the commit point. Genus-to-species (a different axis than the affordance partnership). Signaling supplies the genus: Revealing hidden information. Signifier preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A perceptible cue placed on or near an action possibility so the possibility is recognized in time to be used—what makes an affordance perceivable, not what makes it possible. 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.


Signifier–signified duality is the specific shape representation takes when a perceptible form is conventionally bound to a mental concept.

Signifier–signified duality is the structurally-particularized form representation takes in the semiotic case: the target is the conceptual signified, the medium is the perceptible signifier, and the correspondence is the conventional binding maintained by a semiotic community. It satisfies representation's faithfulness-claim apparatus — target, medium, stated convention — particularized by the two-faced sign structure where neither face exists without the other and the convention is largely arbitrary.


And emphatic: silence_as_signal is "the sharpened, error-naming specialisation" of absence_as_information — "narrower and carries a sign," naming the specific ERROR of misreading a cost-suppressed absence as the negative state, with its one named mechanism (cost-asymmetric production) and repair catalogue. Clean is a specialization of, high conviction. Absence as Information supplies the genus: The non-occurrence of an expected event is itself a positive signal. Silence as Signal preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Cost-asymmetric record production makes absence misread as the negative 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.


Boundedness is the static fact that a field has a capacity limit (the PRECONDITION); this prime is the DYNAMIC failure when a long-lived deployment drifts past it and the crossing rolls SILENTLY. Presupposes boundedness. Boundedness supplies the prerequisite condition: Values remain within limits. Silent Representation Overflow operates against that background: A bounded field silently rolls past its capacity and a blind consumer trusts it. 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 similarity measure is a function mapping specialized to pairs of represented objects and a comparable degree of likeness.

It inherits Function Mapping's stable input-to-output rule and adds paired inputs, a declared representation and relevance frame, and an output ordered as greater or lesser likeness. Functions mapping pairs to costs, causal effects, or arbitrary labels lack that differentia.


A similarity measure presupposes a comparison frame that makes the two objects commensurable under selected respects.

Without comparands, a shared representation, and a relevance rule selecting which respects matter, the numerical or ordinal output has no determinate meaning as likeness. Comparison is prerequisite apparatus, not the genus: comparisons can produce contrasts, orderings, or qualitative alignments without a reusable likeness measure.


The Simpson–Yule effect is 'the DRAMATIC special case' of confounding — distortion severe enough that the pooled association reverses/vanishes/appears under aggregation. 'All Simpson–Yule reversals are instances of confounding, but most confounding is not severe enough.' Strict specialization. Confounding supplies the genus: Hidden variable interference. Simpson–Yule Effect preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: An association measured in pooled data can reverse, vanish, or appear once the data are partitioned by a confounder unevenly distributed across the compared groups. 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.


Simpson's paradox is the most dramatic SYMPTOM of confounding — the case severe enough to flip the SIGN between aggregate and every subgroup. Every Simpson reversal is a confounding case; most confounding is not a Simpson reversal. A specialization/extreme-case of confounding.


It is the confounded failure MODE of the aggregation operation — pooling across a confounder is a modelling choice that can flip a direction; 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. Simpson's Paradox operates against that background: A relationship can run one direction inside every subgroup and the opposite direction in the aggregate, because a confounder's distribution differs across subgroups and is silently mixed away on pooling. 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.


Simpson's Paradox is typically a specialization of Modifiable Areal Unit Problem, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Modifiable Areal Unit Problem supplies the genus: Statistics computed on aggregated data change, sometimes reversing sign, when the boundaries used to aggregate are redrawn — the partition is a non-neutral analytical input. Simpson's Paradox preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A relationship can run one direction inside every subgroup and the opposite direction in the aggregate, because a confounder's distribution differs across subgroups and is silently mixed away on pooling. 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.


Simulated Annealing is a kind of heuristic: probabilistic acceptance with a cooling schedule yields good-enough optima without exhaustive search.

Simulated annealing escapes local optima by accepting worsening moves with probability exp(-DeltaE/T) and gradually lowering T, producing high-quality solutions in vastly less time than exhaustive search at the cost of no guarantee of global optimality. That is the heuristic profile: a simplified rule whose value lies in its favorable trade-off between speed, computational cost, and accuracy on the problems where it is actually deployed. It specializes heuristic to combinatorial optimization with thermal analogy.


Simulated annealing presupposes the stochasticity-vs-determinism distinction because its escape from local optima depends on probabilistically accepting worsening moves.

Simulated annealing presupposes the stochasticity-vs-determinism distinction because its central mechanism is the probabilistic acceptance of worsening moves with probability exp(-DeltaE/T), enabling escape from local optima that a purely deterministic descent could not exit. The algorithm trades on the structural option of intrinsic randomness rather than fully determined transitions. Without the prior availability of stochastic choice as a distinct dynamical regime, the cooling-schedule asymptotic-convergence story collapses, and the search reduces to deterministic local descent with no mechanism for crossing energy barriers.


Simulated annealing is a specialization of optimization that searches by probabilistic neighbor moves under a cooling schedule.

Simulated annealing is a specialization of optimization. Specifically, it instantiates the search-for-an-element-maximizing-or-minimizing-an-objective-under-constraints by exploring a neighborhood structure with metropolis-style acceptance probabilities exp(-deltaE/T) and a decreasing temperature schedule. The decision variables, objective, and constraints are exactly an optimization triplet; the operative notion of optimality is asymptotic global-with-high-probability rather than exact. The thermal escape from local optima is what distinguishes this stochastic metaheuristic within the broader class of optimization methods.


Simulated_annealing is the in-silico combinatorial-search transcription (Metropolis rule = literal Boltzmann factor) of the general agitate-then-cool-on-a-schedule protocol. annealing is the parent. Annealing supplies the genus: Lift a stuck system into a high-mobility regime, then withdraw the agitation along a controlled schedule so it settles into a better configuration than it could reach cold. Simulated Annealing preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Probabilistic search escaping local optima. 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.


Single Point of Failure is the Center of Gravity 'seen from the defender's side', the same structural object without the optimizing attacker and migration. Center Of Gravity supplies the genus: In an adversarial system, the single cohesion-bearing node whose disruption disproportionately changes the whole contest — concentrating both defence and attack at that point. Single Point of Failure preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A component on the critical path of every essential function, with no parallel route, that caps the whole system's reliability at its own. 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 Single Point of Failure is a serial articulation node on the operational DEPENDENCY graph whose removal disconnects it; it presupposes a dependency topology and names the node every critical path runs through with no parallel route.

An SPOF is a serial articulation node on the operational DEPENDENCY graph whose removal disconnects it; it presupposes a dependency topology and names the node every critical path runs through with no parallel route. (bottleneck is the nearest competing genus but governs throughput, not reliability — see rationale.)


Single Point of Failure is a specialization of Vulnerability Hotspot, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Vulnerability Hotspot supplies the genus: A place, population, or component where multiple independent sensitivities co-locate, so the joint probability of harm there is far larger than the product of marginal probabilities elsewhere and risk clusters rather than spreads evenly. Single Point of Failure preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A component on the critical path of every essential function, with no parallel route, that caps the whole system's reliability at its own. 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.


Situation awareness contains linked representations of current elements, contextual meaning, and projected near-future state.

Perception, comprehension, and projection must produce internal state-bearing products that guide delayed action; without those representations there is sensation or reaction but no three-level situation awareness.


Social capital is the specific shape network takes when the connection pattern itself functions as a productive resource for the connected actors.

Social capital is the specific shape network takes when the entities are persons or groups and the connection pattern — the ties, their density, their bridging or bonding character — operates as a productive resource enabling actions infeasible for isolated actors. It is a structurally-particularized instance of the connection pattern carrying explanatory power independent of the entities, with the added commitment that the pattern's value is measured in what it enables: information flow, mutual support, credit without collateral, coordinated action. The resource inheres in ties, not in nodes, so an individual's access depends on position.


Trust is an internal constituent of social capital, enabling vulnerable cooperation and exchange across network ties without complete monitoring.

Social capital treats relationships, trust, shared norms, and network position as productive resources that enable coordinated action unavailable to isolated actors. Trust is an explicit internal constituent of that resource bundle: confident reliance under vulnerability allows delegation, exchange, mutual support, and credit without exhaustive monitoring or collateral. Network ties without this trust component would not supply the reduced transaction costs and cooperative capacity that the live social-capital definition identifies.


Shared social norms are internal constituents of social capital, making reciprocity and cooperation predictable across a network.

Social capital is the productive resource constituted by relationships, trust, shared norms, and network structure. Social norms are explicit internal constituents: distributed expectations of reciprocity, honesty, and contribution make behavior predictable and sustain cooperation without repeated case-by-case negotiation. Removing shared norms would leave connections and perhaps interpersonal trust, but would remove one of the named mechanisms through which the network coordinates collective action and reduces transaction costs.


Social choice is preference aggregation: a rule mapping a profile of individual orderings to one collective outcome. It presupposes aggregation as the collapsing operation, specialized to preference-bearing inputs + a property set the impossibility results constrain.


Social Construction of Reality presupposes Internalization: external patterns become objective reality only once agents take them inward as endogenous.

Social construction of reality runs externalization, objectivation, and internalization as the cycle by which human activity produces patterns that become treated as objective social facts. The closing move — agents taking norms, roles, and category structures inward so that what was once enforced externally is governed from within — is exactly Internalization. Without that inward crossing, the constructed patterns would remain mere external impositions; social construction presupposes internalization as the mechanism that makes the construction self-sustaining.


Social construction of reality presupposes performativity because objectivation only sticks when constitutive acts repeatedly enact what they name.

Social construction of reality presupposes performativity because the externalization-objectivation-internalization cycle works only insofar as constitutive acts bring social facts into being by being performed under shared felicity conditions. A marriage, a status, a category becomes treated as objective reality not because it describes an independent world but because authorized utterances and practices enact it. Without the constitutive-rather-than-descriptive move that performativity names, the joint human activity Berger and Luckmann describe cannot produce the apparently-thinglike institutions it generates.


A social dilemma is a specific kind of trade-off where individual-rational and collective-welfare dimensions are coupled in opposition.

A social dilemma is a specialization of trade-offs. The general pattern requires improving on one valued dimension to worsen another within a feasible set; a social dilemma instantiates this with the two dimensions being individual payoff and collective payoff, coupled such that the dominant individual strategy strictly degrades collective welfare. The Prisoner's Dilemma structure is the trade-off pattern with these particular axes operative and decision-makers who genuinely care about both, so the conflict between private rationality and group outcome is real rather than illusory.


Social Dilemma is a specialization of Non-Zero-Sum Game, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Non-Zero-Sum Game supplies the genus: A strategic interaction whose joint payoff is not fixed: cooperative play can create value and destructive play can destroy it, so the size of the pie is endogenous to the strategy profile. Social Dilemma preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Individually rational defection yields a collectively worse outcome (canonical form: the Prisoner's Dilemma). 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.


Social identity theory presupposes classification because deriving self-concept from group membership requires categories that sort people into kinds.

Social identity theory begins with social categorization — the cognitive operation by which people parse the social world into discrete categories (nation, occupation, religion, team). Without that prior sorting work, there is no category for the self to identify with and no in-group/out-group structure for the rest of the theory to operate on. Classification supplies exactly this deliberate process of assigning entities to discrete categories according to defined criteria. Social identity theory presupposes that classificatory operation as the substrate on which identification, comparison, and intergroup behavior then build.


Social identity theory presupposes set and membership because identification with social categories requires the elemental notion of belonging to a collection.

Social identity theory treats people as members of social categories from which they derive a portion of their self-concept. The whole construction requires set and membership as a prior structure: there must be a collection defined by some inclusion criterion, and an individual must stand in the membership relation to it. Set and membership supplies exactly this — the elemental treatment of a collection as a first-class object and the relation that says, for any candidate, whether it belongs. Without this primitive, there is no group for identity to attach to.


Social Identity Theory presupposes in-group/out-group because its categorization-identification-comparison machinery operates on the we-they partition.

Social Identity Theory explains how individuals derive self-concept from social categories through categorization, identification, comparison, and distinctiveness-seeking. Each of these processes operates on a we-versus-they partition: categorization sorts people into in-group and out-group, identification binds self to the in-group, comparison favors the in-group over the out-group. The theory presupposes the we-they partition with its asymmetric treatment as the structural field on which it builds. Without an in-group/out-group division, there is nothing for social identification to attach to or for intergroup comparison to operate over.


Social loafing is the specific shape free riding takes when individual contribution to a pooled output is not separately measurable.

Social loafing is the structurally-particularized form free riding takes in the team-effort case: when output pools individual contributions inseparably, the marginal benefit of one's own effort to personal evaluation and reward falls as group size rises, and rational self-interest reduces per-person contribution. It inherits free riding's structural commitment — benefit without proportionate contribution from a non-excludable joint product — particularized to the effort-allocation case where the joint product is task completion and non-excludability arises from non-attribution.


Social norms and informal enforcement are interdefinable complements: norms carry anticipated decentralized response, while informal enforcement presupposes a shared behavioral expectation.

Social norms and informal enforcement are interdefinable structural complements. A norm differs from a private preference because members anticipate distributed approval, correction, withdrawal, or sanction, even when conformity keeps any overt response latent. Informal enforcement, in turn, presupposes a shared expectation that gives the response its target. The relation does not require visible punishment in every norm instance; it requires a decentralized response structure capable of maintaining the expectation.


Social norms are the social-group form normativity takes when behavioral standards are distributed through shared expectation, internalization, and informal sanction.

Social norms establish shared expectations about how similarly situated group members ought to behave and make deviation criticizable and sanctionable. Removing the group, behavioral, distributed-knowledge, internalization, and informal-enforcement frame leaves normativity's portable structure: a standard partitions conduct into required, permissible, prohibited, correct, or deviant states and thereby enables evaluation and guidance. Social norms are that normative structure embodied in decentralized social practice.


Sociotechnical systems presupposes emergence because joint outcomes arise from social–technical interaction in ways not reducible to either domain alone.

Sociotechnical systems presupposes emergence because its defining claim — that outcomes arise from interdependent social and technical interaction, not from either component in isolation — is precisely an emergence claim at the higher level of organization. It inherits emergence's structural commitment: the higher-level phenomenon (organizational behavior, work outcomes) has properties not predictable from the lower-level constituents (technology alone or humans alone) and not reducible to their separate descriptions. Same-technology-different-outcomes is the emergence signature.


Sociotechnical systems presupposes coupling because the framework's central claim is that social and technical subsystems are dynamically linked and inseparable.

Sociotechnical systems analysis rests on the claim that outcomes arise from the interdependent interaction of social and technical components — change in one produces change in the other through specifiable mechanisms of mutual influence. Without coupling's machinery of dynamic linkage between subsystems with specifiable interaction strength, there would be no structural basis for treating social and technical components as a single integrated system rather than as separable layers. Coupling supplies the interaction-channel structure that makes sociotechnical analysis a non-decomposable enterprise.


Sociotechnical systems is the specific shape systems thinking takes when the parts in interdependent relation are human-organizational and technical components.

Sociotechnical systems is the structurally-particularized instance of systems thinking in which the unit of analysis is the interlock between social components (people, culture, organization) and technical components (tools, processes, infrastructure). It carries forward the general systems-thinking commitment that outcomes are governed by relationships and feedback among parts rather than by parts in isolation, and gives it specific shape: the same technology produces different results under different work organizations because outcomes depend on the joint design of social and technical subsystems.


Solidarity is the specific shape internalization takes when group fate is taken inward as a personal stake binding individual to collective action.

Solidarity is the specific shape internalization takes when what crosses the boundary from outside to inside is the group's fate and obligation structure. The boundary-relocation internalization names appears here as members taking the group's interest as partly their own: generalized mutual obligation and fate-sharing operate from within rather than via external sanction or case-by-case exchange. What was an external bond -- enforced by community pressure or transactional exchange -- becomes an internal disposition to bear cost on behalf of fellow members, exactly the externally-mediated-to-endogenously-governed pattern internalization describes.


Solidarity presupposes cooperation because internalized fate-sharing only matters where individual incentive pulls against collective contribution.

Solidarity names a felt mutual obligation that disposes members to bear individual cost on behalf of the collective, sustaining contribution without case-by-case exchange. Its work is visible precisely in the gap between privately optimal and collectively optimal action — the gap that defines cooperation. Where contribution and self-interest already coincide, no solidarity is needed to produce joint benefit. Solidarity functions as one of the durable mechanisms that close cooperation's defection gap, so its purpose presupposes the cooperation problem it answers.


Solidarity presupposes group cohesion because fate-sharing and felt mutual obligation only exist within a collective that is bound together as a unit.

Solidarity is the disposition of members to bear individual cost for fellow members, sustained by internalized fate-sharing and generalized obligation. Those dispositions presuppose that the collective already holds together as a unit rather than dissolving into separate individuals — exactly the resistance-to-fragmentation that group cohesion names. Without the underlying binding force that keeps the group from breaking apart, there is no membership for solidarity's obligations to attach to. Solidarity is one of several superposable sources that supply cohesion, and operates only where cohesion is already a meaningful structural property.


Source-sink dynamics is constituted by a DIRECTED FLOW between sites on which the sink depends ('the direction of the flow is load-bearing'); it presupposes flow. Flow supplies the prerequisite condition: Structured movement of energy, matter, or information. Source-Sink Dynamics operates against that background: A system persists across coupled sites with asymmetric net balance: net-producing sources export a surplus that sustains net-consuming sinks which would decline in isolation. 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 source-sink role is a classification specialized by an explicit signed-net-flux rule.

It sorts bounded components into discrete source, sink, or balanced roles by applying one reusable decision rule: compute net transfer relative to a reference pool over a stated window and read its sign. It adds the boundary, window, tracked-quantity, and sign-flip commitments to the general classification operation.


Assigning a source or sink role requires a bounded stock-flow account linking the component to a reference reservoir.

Without named components, a reference pool, and directed inflows and outflows of a tracked quantity, no net flux can be computed and the sign has no referent. The reservoir-flux network supplies that accounting substrate; the source-sink role adds a conditional sign classification.


Sovereignty presupposes boundary because it defines a demarcated domain within which final decision authority holds and beyond which it does not.

Sovereignty presupposes boundary because the doctrine operationally requires a demarcated domain that distinguishes inside (where the sovereign decides) from outside (where it cannot). It inherits boundary's four-part structure: the bounded entity (the sovereign's territory or jurisdiction), the demarcation criterion (recognized scope), the permeability (treaties, extradition, intervention), and the operative force (final authority within). Internal and external sovereignty are precisely the inside-authority and outside-recognition faces of a boundary applied to political decision rights.


Sovereignty presupposes authority because final decision-making within a domain is a particular form of legitimate binding power.

Sovereignty is the authority principle that one entity holds final, non-overridable decision-making power within a defined domain, with internal and external components. The construct is meaningful only as a specific structural form of authority — the legitimate capacity to make binding decisions and create persisting obligations. Authority supplies the underlying recognized-power-to-decide; sovereignty specializes it by adding finality (no external override), domain-boundedness (the zone of autonomous action), and recognition by other sovereigns. Without authority as the structural ground, sovereignty's finality has no decision-power to be final over.


Spaced repetition presupposes learning because it is a procedure for strengthening durable memory updates against forgetting over time.

Spaced repetition presupposes learning because it operates as a memory-strengthening procedure on items that have already been encoded as candidate learning, and it targets the durability dimension of the learner's internal update. Without learning's underlying experience-driven self-update, there is no encoded representation for the expanding-interval review schedule to act upon. Spaced repetition supplies the strength-modulated rescheduling that converts fragile acquisitions into stable ones, but the acquisition machinery itself is supplied by learning.


Spaced repetition is an interval-scheduling pedagogical technique; typical because it is often self-directed rather than other-directed. Pedagogy supplies the genus: Deliberate other-directed structuring of a learner's encounter with content to cause durable change in their capability. Spaced Repetition preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Reinforce over intervals. 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.


Span is the framed or domain-specific realization of Basis; removing the local frame leaves the parent's structural relation intact.

After the mathematics frame is stripped away, the retained structural roles are those of Basis: A minimal independent generating set — the smallest collection from which every element of a space can be produced, with no member derivable from the others. Span adds the local frame and commitments expressed in its identity: The complete set reachable by combining primitives under admissible operations. 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.


Span is the reachable CLOSURE of a primitive set under an admissible-operations grammar — a closure (operations stay within a set) enriched with generators and a grammar and a gap-to-target fork.

Span is the reachable CLOSURE of a primitive set under an admissible-operations grammar — a closure (operations stay within a set) enriched with generators + a grammar + a gap-to-target fork. closure is the structural genus.


Sparse coding is a representational-architecture pattern — a specific way of representing content (few-of-many active over a large pool). is a specialization of specialized representation scheme. Representation supplies the genus: Model complex ideas. Sparse Coding preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A system represents each input by activating a small content-specific subset of a much larger pool of units, gaining combinatorial capacity from the choice of which few are active. 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.


The specific organization that makes POSITION/REGION queries output-sensitive (via metric embedding) — a specialization of the general search_and_retrieval problem. Search and Retrieval supplies the genus: Locate and extract information. Spatial Indexing preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Organizing items by position in a space so retrieval, neighborhood, and range queries become geometric and output-sensitive. 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.


Speculative bubbles are a specialization of increasing returns in which rising valuations attract more buyers, driving valuations higher still.

Speculative bubbles are a kind of increasing returns specialized to asset valuation under reflexive expectations: rising prices increase each marginal buyer's willingness to enter because rising prices are themselves the expected payoff. It inherits the general pattern that the marginal benefit of additional commitment rises with the cumulative state variable, producing self-reinforcing dynamics, and supplies the specific case where the accumulating variable is valuation and the loop is expectational — until the inflow exhausts and the increasing-returns regime reverses sharply into a crash.


Speculative bubbles presuppose reflexivity because the self-reinforcing boom-bust loop is driven by beliefs about prices becoming inputs that shape prices.

Speculative bubbles presuppose reflexivity because the boom-then-bust signature is generated by traders' beliefs about future prices becoming inputs that drive current prices, which feed back into beliefs. Reflexivity supplies the general structural pattern in which a system's models of itself become inputs that shape its behavior — the self-referential coupling between observation and observed. Bubbles supply the specific market case where the reflexive coupling between expectations and valuations overshoots fundamentals and then collapses; without the reflexive loop, the detachment from fundamentals would not be self-reinforcing.


A speculative bubble is the specific shape feedback takes when valuation and expectation of future rises form a self-reinforcing loop that overshoots and collapses.

A speculative bubble is the positive-feedback particularization of feedback applied to asset valuation: rising prices feed expectations of further rises, which drive more buying, which drives prices higher still, until the loop exhausts its inflow and reverses sharply. Where feedback names the closure of a loop between system output and subsequent input generally, the bubble fixes the variable (price), the sign (reinforcing), the medium (collective expectation), and the characteristic boom-then-bust signature of an overshoot-and-collapse trajectory.


Speech act theory is the specific shape performativity takes when an utterance's illocutionary force constitutes the social fact it names.

Speech act theory is the structurally-particularized form performativity takes in the linguistic-utterance case: the locutionary act delivers form, the illocutionary act carries conventional force that brings the named state into being under felicity conditions, and the perlocutionary act tracks downstream effects. It inherits performativity's commitment that the act and the fact are co-created in one move, particularized to the three-layer analysis of how speech does things rather than describes them.


Spinodal decomposition is the barrier-less instability case: a homogeneous state with negative local-stability curvature amplifies ambient fluctuations rather than damping them — a specialization of instability (perturbations grow). Instability supplies the genus: Amplifies perturbations. Spinodal Decomposition preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A uniform state spontaneously separates into distinct phases because it is itself unstable, so ambient fluctuations are amplified rather than damped, producing a characteristic-wavelength pattern without any barrier or nucleus. 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.


A uniform (symmetric) state spontaneously separates into distinct phases at a characteristic wavelength — barrier-less symmetry breaking. Symmetry Breaking supplies the genus: Loss of symmetry creates structure. Spinodal Decomposition preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: A uniform state spontaneously separates into distinct phases because it is itself unstable, so ambient fluctuations are amplified rather than damped, producing a characteristic-wavelength pattern without any barrier or nucleus. 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.


Spiral of Silence presupposes the positive feedback loop through which visible suppression changes perceived opinion climate and induces further suppression.

Each round of silence makes one side look less prevalent, which raises the perceived cost of expressing that side and produces more silence. Without this recursive return from public expression to later expression choices, isolated preference falsification would not become a population-level spiral.


Spiral of Silence contains preference-falsifying suppression choices as the individual acts aggregated and amplified by its climate-perception feedback loop.

Preference Falsification is the individual expressive act under asymmetric cost; Spiral of Silence is the population-level feedback dynamic that aggregates those acts, feeds the distorted visible distribution back into perceived climate, and amplifies further suppression. The acts are internal constituents of the loop, not a genus of the whole dynamic.


Spiral of Silence is the temporal-feedback species of Private-Public Preference Divergence in which suppression recursively steepens the apparent majority.

Every spiral sustains a gap between privately held and publicly expressed opinion, then adds the specific mechanism that the visible gap changes perceived climate and raises the cost of later dissent. Private-Public Preference Divergence can exist as a snapshot or through other mechanisms, so Spiral of Silence is its strict feedback-driven species.


Spiral of Silence contains a perceived-minority Threshold below which the expected cost of expression triggers suppression.

The dynamic requires a boundary at which perceived minority status changes expression behavior. Remove that gating point and the loop loses the suppression trigger that produces its slow build and possible cascade reversal. Threshold is therefore a constituent of the social-opinion whole, while generic thresholds do not contain or depend on Spiral of Silence.


Sponsor Vacuum presupposes Authority, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Authority supplies the prerequisite condition: The recognized, legitimate right to issue binding decisions within a defined scope, distinct from raw coercive force or mere persuasive influence. Sponsor Vacuum operates against that background: A designated decision-resolving role is occupied but disengaged, and its nominal occupancy suppresses the formation of substitute decision channels, so the system loses both the function and its replacement. 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 positive-feedback loop running through agents/components inside a system (low volatility -> relaxed vigilance -> raised exposure -> more fragility). Presupposes feedback. (feedback canonical.). Feedback supplies the prerequisite condition: Outputs influence inputs. Stability-Induced Fragility operates against that background: Prolonged calm endogenously erodes the response capacity that stressors keep exercised. 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.


Stack is the LIFO species of order, adding strict nesting and last-opened-first-closed precedence.

Stack is a specialized ordering discipline in which entries form a strict nesting relation and the most recently opened item must be the next one closed; removing that differentia leaves the more general ordering relation.


Stage-gate is a sequence of precedence-ordered, evidence-conditional stages with escalating commitment — a specialization of sequencing (deliberate ordering of steps under precedence). The gate-decision chain is the load-bearing structure; sequencing is the genus.


Stakeholder analysis is the specific shape classification takes when applied to parties with a legitimate interest in a decision or project.

Classification is the deliberate process of assigning entities to discrete categories according to explicit rules. Stakeholder analysis is the particular shape this operation takes when the entities are parties with a stake in a decision and the categories sort them by interest, power, legitimacy, urgency, or relationship to the outcome. It is a structurally-particularized instance of classification whose specific machinery is enumeration of parties, criteria for sorting them into bins (high-power high-interest, low-power high-interest, etc.), and a management plan keyed to the resulting category structure.


Stakeholder analysis presupposes boundary because identifying who has a legitimate interest requires deciding who is inside the system of consequence and who is outside.

Stakeholder analysis enumerates parties with legitimate interest, exposure, or claim, which structurally requires drawing a boundary between those inside the system of consequence and those outside it. Without the boundary prime's machinery — demarcation between an entity and its outside, with attendant flows and accountability — there would be no principled basis for the inclusion-exclusion decision that determines who counts as a stakeholder. The boundary structure is what makes stakeholder identification a determinate analytic operation rather than an open-ended listing.


Starvation is 'a particular liveness outcome that contention can produce' — a failure mode of contention under a locally-rational priority rule. It presupposes contention; contention is the general condition, starvation the specific liveness violation. Interference and Contention supplies the prerequisite condition: Competing demands for shared bottleneck degrade throughput. Starvation operates against that background: A participant who is eligible and in the queue is perpetually denied service, not by exclusion but because a locally rational priority rule always picks someone else. 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.


Stasis shares framing's meta-level character but ADDS what framing lacks — a specific small ORDERED typology of question-kinds (conjecture, definition, quality, jurisdiction) with a logical priority. It decomposes 'partly into framing'; framing is the broad genus, stasis the typed-disagreement species. NOTE this is the rhetoric prime (locate the KIND of question in a dispute), not stillness/equilibrium. Framing supplies the genus: Presentation shapes perception. Stasis preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Locate the kind of question at issue in a dispute—did it happen, what is it, was it justified, whose call is it—before contesting the substance, since disputants who seem to disagree about the answer are often disagreeing about the question. 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.


A state-and-transition model contains a phase or state space specifying the possible states over which its transition relation operates.

Remove the set of admissible system states and the transition relation loses its domain and codomain: there is no defined condition from which the system can move or to which it can arrive. Phase Space is the whole possibility set contained in the larger state-plus-transition model.


Stated Preference presupposes an underlying preference because the solicited report is evidence about an ordering, not the ordering itself.

A stated-preference instrument asks an agent to report which outcomes, actions, or bundles it favors. Without Preference as the latent evaluative ordering, there is nothing for the answer to represent or for the analyst to infer. Stated Preference adds an access method and its distortions; it is not the underlying valuation.