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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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


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


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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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


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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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


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


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


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

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


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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


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

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


Exponentiation is a specific kind of iteration where repeated multiplication makes each round's increment proportional to the current state.

Exponentiation is a specialization of iteration. The general pattern is the repeated application of a step with state carried between rounds and progress measured across rounds. Exponentiation instantiates this with the per-iteration step being multiplication by a fixed factor, so the increment at each step is proportional to the current state rather than to a fixed quantity. This produces the constant-ratio successive values that distinguish exponential growth or decay from linear or polynomial accumulation. Compound interest, radioactive decay, and viral early-outbreak dynamics are the same iterative pattern under different per-step multipliers.


Exponentiation presupposes recurrence because repeated multiplication is the iterated application of a constant-ratio rule across steps.

Exponentiation presupposes recurrence because b to the n is generated by reapplying multiplication-by-b at each step, exactly the structural recurrence x_{n+1} = b*x_n whose closed form is exponential. The constant-ratio-between-successive-values signature that distinguishes exponential from linear growth is a recurrence relation. Without recurrence's pattern of values reappearing across iterations under an identifiable rule, the per-step proportional growth has no generating structure; exponentiation is the family of solutions to the simplest multiplicative recurrence. Recurrence supplies the prerequisite condition: The property by which a state, event, or value reappears across time or iterations because the present state depends on prior states, distinct from mere repetition by its measurable lag structure. Exponentiation operates against that background: Repeated multiplication scaling. 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.


Exposure Creep presupposes Risk, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Risk supplies the prerequisite condition: Exposure to a known distribution of possible outcomes. Exposure Creep operates against that background: Between rare severe shocks, valuable assets accumulate inside a known hazard's impact zone because a quiet history reads as safety, so the next shock's loss is driven by the grown stake rather than by any change in the hazard. 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.


Exposure-distribution learning is Learning specialized to durable frequency-sensitive updates from an encountered observation distribution.

The learner's internal state changes through repeated experience and the change persists into later prediction or behavior. The differentia is that the retained state encodes empirical frequencies or regularities of the exposure stream rather than a single association or skill.


A retained internal representation of the exposure distribution is a strict constituent of Exposure-Distribution Learning.

The mechanism is identified by comparing an agent's post-exposure expectations with the statistics it repeatedly encountered. Without an internal representation that can encode those regularities, there is no model whose calibration can drift toward the exposure distribution.


Exposure Pathway typically presupposes Risk, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Risk supplies the prerequisite condition: Exposure to a known distribution of possible outcomes. Exposure Pathway operates against that background: The chain of links by which a hazard travels from source to vulnerable target, breakable at any link, turning risk into a graph search over severable routes. 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.


External analytic challenge contains feedback because its probes must return to alter or explicitly re-justify the next state of the work. Cut the challenge-to-response return path and the outsider can comment but cannot correct the work; the structure becomes observation or later judgment rather than pre-commitment challenge. parent_in_child


External analytic challenge presupposes a reversibility horizon because it must land before accumulated commitment makes correction costlier than carrying the work forward. If reversal cost does not change with timing, pre-commitment challenge has no structural advantage over post-commitment review and the defining scheduling constraint disappears. External challenge is a review arrangement timed relative to a commitment threshold, not a species of reversibility horizon.


External analytic challenge contains viewpoint because the challenger must occupy a station whose access, occlusion, and bias profile differ from the authoring frame. Remove the differently positioned station and a challenger sharing the same accumulated access and blind spots cannot provide the outside-frame correction the identity requires. parent_in_child


Externality is the specific shape allocation takes when third-party effects of an action are not reflected in the price the decision-maker pays.

Allocation is the assignment of a limited supply across competing claimants subject to feasibility, with the question of who or what gets how much as the bare assignment itself. Externality is the particular shape this pattern takes when the assignment fails to incorporate third-party effects: a producer or consumer takes an action whose private cost or benefit diverges from the social cost or benefit, and the market — absent intervention — produces an allocation in which the unpriced residue lands on parties not in the transaction. A structurally-particularized instance of allocation whose specific defect is misassignment from unpriced flows.


Externality presupposes the price mechanism because the externality is defined by what falls outside the price signal that coordinates market exchange.

An externality is constituted as the unpriced residue of an economic action — the consequence to third parties that the market price fails to internalize. Without the price mechanism's role as the scalar signal that aggregates private costs and benefits into the coordinating signal between buyers and sellers, there would be no baseline against which to identify the externality's unpriced character. The externality is intelligible only against the background expectation that prices ought to convey full social cost, which the price-mechanism prime supplies.


'externality is the side-effect pattern given a price-system framing' — the substrate-specific, priced, third-party instance. side_effect is the substrate-neutral parent; externality keeps its price_mechanism/allocation parents. Side Effect supplies the genus: An action's change to shared state beyond its declared interface. Externality preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Spillover effects. 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.


Extrapolation beyond a sampled regime presupposes a validation claim whose evidential scope is bounded by the regime on which competence was established.

The failure is not merely encountering a novel input. It is carrying a competence claim, calibrated confidence display, or rule validated on one regime into another where that evidence does not reach. Validation supplies the original claim and its legitimate evidential envelope.


Extrapolation beyond a sampled regime is Transferability Overclaim specialized to a calibrated apparatus that leaves its validated regime while continuing to display in-regime confidence.

Every admitted case carries a locally warranted competence or reliability claim beyond the sampled regime that bounded its evidence. The apparatus continues to present the output and confidence as though those scope conditions still held, creating the parent's reach-versus-warrant gap. Extrapolation adds a calibrated apparatus, an out-of-regime input, a self-blind confidence indicator, and an absent regime-exit detector.


Extreme Capture Probability is a probability law over which rare targets a bounded selection includes.

The pattern quantifies uncertainty about intersection between an accessible sample and a distinguished rare-target set. Its central claims — n/N for one target and the hypergeometric complement for k targets — require Probability as their formal substrate.


Eyes on the street is the specific shape monitoring takes when observation is distributed, incidental, mutually-visible, and parasitic on other activity. 'a subspecies of monitoring with sharply different enabling conditions.'. Monitoring supplies the genus: Continuously observing a system's state to detect deviation from expected behavior and trigger a response, separating genuine signal from routine noise. Eyes On The Street preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Safety and accountability produced as a byproduct of dense incidental observation by embedded participants, conditional on shared space, mutual visibility, and a low-cost intervention pathway. 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.


Fabula and Syuzhet usually presupposes Narrative because the distinction originated as a way to separate a story's event chronology from its order of presentation, but the separation can transfer to non-narrative ordered representations.

Narrative supplies the canonical object in which fabula and syuzhet was identified: connected events can be reconstructed into an underlying chronology while being encountered in a deliberately chosen order. Yet the prime's portable structure is the separation between an underlying event order and an order of presentation, which can also organize logs, interfaces, curricula, and technical explanations that are not narratives in the stronger story-like sense. Narrative is therefore a typical enabling context rather than a universal containing whole.


Fabula (content/what) and syuzhet (form/how presented) is a specific instance of the form-content duality applied to narrative temporal sequencing. Form and Content supplies the genus: The relationship between a work's structure and its substance. Fabula And Syuzhet preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: The chronology of events and the order in which they are told are separable design objects, each optimizable for its own criterion. The parent can occur without those added commitments, whereas removing the parent structure leaves no basis for classifying the child as this subtype. That asymmetry establishes subsumption rather than mere association. The 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.


Fact-Value Distinction contains Normativity because one side of the distinction must consist of genuinely evaluative, reason-giving, or ought-bearing content.

Normativity supplies standards, reasons, permissions, prohibitions, and other ought-bearing claims. Remove that content and the fact-value distinction collapses into a classification among descriptive claim types; the child adds the descriptive contrast and the bridge discipline governing movement between the two.


Factorial Design is the specific shape decomposition takes when an experiment is structured into factors with main effects and interactions.

A factorial design varies multiple factors simultaneously at multiple levels in a single integrated experiment, exposing each factor's main effect and the interactions between factors. The whole experiment is broken into a structured set of parts — factors and their level combinations — that, properly combined, reconstitute the full design and license clean attribution of variation. That is the move of Decomposition, here specifically shaped as a multi-factor cross-classification that exposes both additive contributions and interaction structure invisible to one-factor-at-a-time designs.


Factorial design is the specific shape experimental design takes when multiple factors are varied simultaneously to reveal main effects and interactions.

Factorial design is the particular form experimental design takes when several factors are crossed within one integrated experiment rather than varied one-at-a-time. The structure observes every combination (or a balanced subset) of factor levels, which both estimates main effects efficiently and reveals interactions — effects that depend on other factors' levels — that no single-factor design can detect. The general architecture of principled comparison under randomization is specialized here to multi-factor combinatorial assignment, trading one-at-a-time intuition for combinatorial efficiency and interaction-detection.


Factorial Design is a specialization of Cartesian Product, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Cartesian Product supplies the genus: All combinations of independent dimensions, one choice per axis. Factorial Design preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Multiple variables tested together. 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.


'Not generic decomposition — factorization adds a hard constraint decomposition lacks': the parts must be same-type and recombine under a NATIVE binary operation under which the kind is closed, recovering the original exactly. A specialization of decomposition (any split). Decomposition supplies the genus: Breaking a whole into parts that can be analyzed independently and recombined to reconstitute the whole, making complexity tractable through divide-and-conquer. Factorization preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Expressing one object as a product of same-type factors under its native operation. 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.


Fail-Safe presupposes Reversibility and Irreversibility: design must classify which post-failure states are safe to settle into and which must be avoided.

Fail-Safe arranges the system so that its default post-failure state is the least harmful available — gates default closed, brakes default engaged, valves default safe — rather than devolving into an uncontrolled state. Choosing such a default requires weighing which transitions are reversible (and so tolerable as a halt state) against which are irreversible (and so must be avoided). That is the apparatus of Reversibility and Irreversibility. Fail-Safe presupposes the reversibility distinction to identify which failure state to engineer toward.


Fail-safe is a specialization of fault tolerance in which continued service is sacrificed and the post-failure default state is engineered to be the least harmful.

Fail-safe is a specialization of fault tolerance in which the response to failure is to drop into a pre-engineered least-harmful state rather than to continue providing service through redundancy or failover. It inherits the general fault-tolerance commitment that components will fail and that the system must be designed so individual failures do not cascade into system-level catastrophe, and specializes by fixing the strategy to safe-default-on-failure (brakes engage when power is lost, valves close when signal is lost) rather than to continued operational availability.


FMEA ranks prospective failure modes by risk-bearing consequences and likelihood or detectability dimensions. Risk supplies the prerequisite condition: Exposure to a known distribution of possible outcomes. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) operates against that background: Identify failure modes. 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.


FMEA decomposes a system or process into distinct failure modes, causes, local effects, and downstream effects for separate evaluation. After the engineering_design frame is stripped away, the retained structural roles are those of Decomposition: Breaking a whole into parts that can be analyzed independently and recombined to reconstitute the whole, making complexity tractable through divide-and-conquer. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) adds the local frame and commitments expressed in its identity: Identify failure modes. 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.


Fairness presupposes impartiality because any defensible standard of fair treatment requires that identity-irrelevant features not systematically move outcomes.

Fairness evaluates whether an allocation, procedure, or treatment respects equal regard and principled differentiation. Whatever fairness criterion is selected — equal shares, desert, need, or capability — it cannot count as fair if the outcome systematically depends on the identity of the party rather than on relevant features of the case. Impartiality supplies that baseline structural requirement: invariance under identity permutation, with like cases treated alike. Fairness then builds on impartiality by specifying which features count as relevant and how they should weight outcomes.


Fallacy Of Misplaced Concreteness is a specialization of Reification, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Reification supplies the genus: An abstraction designed to summarise a substrate is treated as the substrate itself, with the audit trail back to the original allowed to atrophy. Fallacy Of Misplaced Concreteness preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Mistaking an abstraction — a model, statistic, or construct — for a concrete thing, then applying interventions licensed only for the particulars to the reified stand-in. 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.


Fallback Path is the ordered primary-secondary species of diverse pathways that can realize the same minimum function. At least two non-identical pathways can each deliver the specified minimum function, so loss or inadequacy of one need not eliminate it. One path is preferred, another is secondary, and an explicit failure or insufficiency condition governs the handoff.


Fallback is context-triggered switching among maintained operating routes with failure or insufficiency as the cue and priority ordering as its differentia. A controller detects a context condition and selects one maintained mode or route from a discrete repertoire rather than constructing a response anew. The modes are asymmetrically primary and secondary, and the trigger is the primary route's inability to meet a minimum functional requirement.


False Dilemma presupposes Partition, whose structure must already obtain for the child mechanism to be meaningful or operational.

Partition supplies the prerequisite condition: A division of a set into non-overlapping, collectively exhaustive blocks. False Dilemma operates against that background: A partition of a rich option space is presented as exhaustive when it is not, so reasoning proceeds inside cells while real alternatives have been suppressed. 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 paradox 'is an application of Bayes' rule' — posterior odds = prior odds x likelihood ratio — but 'a single, sharp corollary' (low-prior PPV collapse), not the whole machinery. A specialization of bayesian_updating. Bayesian Updating supplies the genus: Update beliefs with evidence. False Positive Paradox preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Under a rare base rate, most positive flags are wrong even when the detector is highly accurate. 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.


Falsifiability and Unfalsifiability are co-defining complements distinguished by whether a stable claim-defeating observation exists.

Each concept fixes the contrast class of the other within empirical claim-evidence relations. Falsifiability requires at least one stable forbidden observation; Unfalsifiability denies that any admissible observation has stable claim-defeating force. Neither is a subtype or component of the other, so the relation is strict and mutual.


Fault Tolerance presupposes Reserve: continued operation under failures draws on redundancy and capacity held beyond expected need.

Fault tolerance keeps systems serviceable when components fail by drawing on redundant components, spare capacity, error-correction overhead, and standby paths designed to absorb failures without service loss. All of those mechanisms are surplus capacity held beyond nominal need, exactly the Reserve pattern — deliberately maintained slack whose value lies in its availability when expected conditions are exceeded. Fault tolerance presupposes reserve as the substrate that the failover, error-correction, and degradation mechanisms consume when faults strike.


Fault tolerance is a specialization of robustness focused on continued operation specifically under component failures rather than across all perturbations.

Fault tolerance specializes robustness by fixing the perturbation class to component failures: hardware breakage, software bugs, network partitions, adversarial corruption. Where robustness names maintained function across a broad envelope of input conditions and disturbances generally, fault tolerance focuses specifically on internal-component failure as the perturbation type, deploying redundancy, monitoring, failover, and graceful degradation as its characteristic mechanisms — a particular shape robustness takes when the threats targeted are the failures of the system's own constituent parts.


Feature engineering deliberately TRANSFORMS the representation of raw observations so a latent regularity becomes legible to a downstream consumer; it presupposes representation and acts on it. Also leans on transformation.


Feedforward contains a predictive representation mapping intended action and disturbance to expected consequence before commitment.

Anticipation without an inspectable or encoded surrogate is guessing; the upstream model is the internal constituent that lets predicted consequences modify the action. Representation supplies an internal constituent: Model complex ideas. Feedforward requires that role within this mechanism: A predictive model of an action's consequences is interposed upstream of commitment, so the actor pre-corrects rather than waits for a deviation to feed back. 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.


Feedforward inhibition is inhibition specialized to the case where the SAME go-signal drives both the activator and a parallel brake (pre-committed, not error-tuned). inhibition is the genus (the general external/applied brake on a transformation); this candidate is the same-input parallel-path special case. NOTE inhibition is also a candidate in THIS batch -> a candidate-to-candidate parent edge. Inhibition supplies the genus: An external agent actively slows, blocks, or reduces an otherwise-active transformation by occupying or counteracting the mechanism that would carry it forward. Feedforward Inhibition preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: The same input that activates a downstream element simultaneously recruits a brake on it along a parallel path, so the response is shaped by their difference. 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.


Figure-Ground is a specialization of Gestalt Principles, retaining the parent's defining structure while adding the child's specific commitments.

Gestalt Principles supplies the genus: Perceptual grouping rules. Figure-Ground preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: Perceptual organization of a field into salient figure and receding ground. 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.


Calls opportunity_asymmetry the prime's genus: first-mover advantage is the species where the asymmetry is TEMPORAL and order-indexed (the same move pays differently by its rank in a sequence). opportunity_asymmetry is the parent. Opportunity Asymmetry supplies the genus: Agents possess unequal access to actions and favorable outcomes. First Mover Advantage preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: When a contest rewards early arrival, the same move yields a different return depending on when in the sequence it is taken. 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 same move yields a different return by sequence position, locking in early arrivals — path dependence in a rewarded contest. Path Dependence supplies the genus: Outcomes are shaped by the specific historical sequence of past choices, which lock in consequences and foreclose alternatives that persist despite present incentives to change. First Mover Advantage preserves that general structure while adding its differentia: When a contest rewards early arrival, the same move yields a different return depending on when in the sequence it is taken. 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 fold is transformation specialized to stress-induced bending that changes shape while preserving continuity.

The input structure maps to a curved output under load while connectivity is invariant; the hinge, stress regime, and bend-rather-than-break condition supply the child's differentia.


Foreseeing is a specific kind of inductive reasoning, drawing a future-state conclusion from observed patterns whose support strength is calibrated.

Foreseeing is a specialization of inductive reasoning. The general pattern is ampliative inference from specific observations to conclusions whose content exceeds what the premises logically guarantee, with quality measured by support strength, calibration, and coverage. Prediction instantiates this with the conclusion being a future state and the premises being the current state plus historical pattern; the predictive model is the inductive bridge, and the calibration loop is precisely the quality test inductive reasoning's framework requires. Prediction carries the characteristic uncertainty of induction because the future may always depart from the observed regularity.


Foreseeing presupposes uncertainty because predicting a future state requires the incomplete knowledge that makes the future an unknown to be characterized.

Foreseeing forms a structured belief about a future state, specifying not just what will happen but the range of plausible outcomes with confidence or probability attached. This presupposes uncertainty: the structural condition of incomplete knowledge about a future state, with the commitment to specify the unknown, the evidence base, and the form of unknowing. The future is the canonical unknown variable; the predictive model is a tool for navigating it; the projected range with attached probability is the uncertainty quantification itself. Without uncertainty's framing of incomplete knowledge as a structured object, prediction collapses into mere assertion.


Foreseeing (prediction) is a specialization of foresight that targets specific future-state claims with calibrated uncertainty rather than scenario sets.

Foreseeing (prediction) is a specialization of foresight. Specifically, it instantiates the structured-future-anticipation stance in the point-estimate-with-uncertainty mode: an explicit predictive model maps current state and historical pattern to a projected future state with attached confidence, closed by a calibration loop comparing predicted to realized outcomes. Like other foresight methods, it serves present perception and choice under uncertainty; unlike scenario planning, it commits to specific outcome claims with probability rather than mapping a plural space of possibilities.


Form and content presupposes representation because the dualism separating what is conveyed from how it is structured operates within representational mappings between target and medium.

Form and content presupposes representation because the dualism that separates the message from its manner of presentation operates only where a structured mapping from a target onto a medium is in play. Representation supplies the target-medium-faithfulness machinery within which the medium's structure (form) shapes how the target's structure (content) is conveyed. Without representation's mapping, there is no medium whose form could constrain or constitute the received content. The form-content distinction is the explicit acknowledgment that representation's medium-side choices are not inert — they channel, distort, and partly constitute what the target conveys.


'Not formalization — formalization is the PROCESS, a formal_system is the ARTIFACT that process aims at.' The finished four-component package presupposes (is the product of) the formalization process. Formalization supplies the prerequisite condition: Rendering informal practice into explicit, codified, rule-governed form. Formal System operates against that background: Symbols, formation rules, axioms, and inference rules closed under mechanical derivation. 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.


Social norms commonly form part of the informal layer that interacts with an organization's codified formal structure.

Formal-versus-informal structures distinguishes codified roles, procedures, and authority from the emergent practices through which a system also operates. Social norms commonly constitute part of that informal layer by supplying shared behavioral expectations and decentralized sanctions absent from the formal chart. The relation is typical rather than strict because an informal layer can also be organized through personal networks, tacit knowledge, reputation-based influence, or improvised workarounds without a clearly norm-governed component.


Formal vs informal structures presupposes formalization because the formal layer is by definition the codified, rule-governed counterpart to the informal practice.

The formal-versus-informal duality requires that some practices be rendered explicit and codified into rules, charters, and policies — the very move that formalization names. Without the formalization machinery — making tacit practice statable, checkable, and transmissible — there would be no formal layer to contrast with the informal layer; the distinction would collapse into a single tier of uncodified practice. Formalization is the structural operation that produces the formal half of the duality, and is therefore presupposed by the dual structure.


Formalization presupposes representation because making practice explicit requires a medium in which axioms, notation, and rules can stand for the target.

Formalization is the move up the explicitness gradient — replacing tacit know-how with codified notation, axioms, or statutes — and that move only operates inside a representational medium. To articulate a previously implicit rule one needs symbols, schemas, or formal language that map onto the practice being captured under a faithfulness convention. Representation supplies the structured mapping of target to medium that formalization then sharpens into mechanically operable, audit-checkable form, so formalization cannot get off the ground without a representational substrate already available.


Formalization is the specific shape transformation takes when tacit practice is restructured into explicit, codified, rule-governed form.

Formalization is the particularization of transformation to the explicitness gradient: the input is tacit, conventional, or intuitive practice; the rule is articulation into notation, axioms, statutes, or schemas; the output is explicit, checkable, transmissible system. Where transformation names structured input-to-output mapping with preserved invariants generally, formalization specifies that the invariant targeted is the substantive content of the practice while the degree of freedom being reshaped is its representational explicitness — moving up from implicit know-how to codified knowledge.


Formative assessment is a kind of monitoring whose continuous evidence-gathering informs in-flight instructional decisions rather than final judgment.

Formative assessment is a specialization of monitoring: continuous in-process observation (quizzes, exit tickets, think-pair-share, draft reviews) accumulates evidence about student learning to detect deviation from expected progress and trigger instructional response. It inherits monitoring's commitment to continuous or periodic observation with threshold comparison and corrective action, particularized to the pedagogical case where the monitored variable is learning state and the response is adjustment of teaching strategy rather than final summative judgment.


Formative assessment is a specific pedagogy that gathers in-process evidence of learning to inform ongoing instructional and learning decisions.

Formative assessment is a specialization of pedagogy whose distinctive move is continuous, in-process evidence-gathering whose purpose is to inform teaching and learning decisions during the instructional cycle rather than render a final verdict. It inherits pedagogy's commitment to deliberately structuring the learner's encounter with content for durable capability change, and adds the specific machinery of assessment-for-learning: quick checks, exit tickets, draft reviews, and feedback loops that let the instructional agent adjust sequencing and support based on evidence of where each learner currently stands.


Formative assessment implements a measure-compare-act feedback loop routing learning evidence back to instruction. Feedback supplies the prerequisite condition: Outputs influence inputs. Formative Assessment operates against that background: Ongoing feedback. 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.