FPF Reference

    C.30.TFS-REL:4.3 - Claim-kind applications named by value

    Preface node heading:c-30-tfs-rel-4-3-claim-kind-applications-named-by-value:62102

    What this page is

    This is generated FPF reference text from the specification preface or supporting sections. It helps interpret FPF; it is not FPF Reference product documentation.

    Methodology

    Use it to understand how the specification wants to be read, then return to a route, pattern, or work packet for active work. Cite generated IDs only when the wording changes the task decision.

    Content

    Claim kind being madeGoverning pattern to apply
    Work occurrence or work resultA.15.1 for the occurrence; A.15 for Method/Work alignment; the governing work-result or P2W relation for those claims
    Gate decisionA.21
    Evidence claimA.10 or G.6
    Assurance claimB.3
    Causal flow or intervention claimC.28
    Mathematical-lens useC.29
    Architecture adequacy, description use, or structural-view adequacyC.30 for architecture adequacy, C.30.AD for architecture-description use, or C.30.ASV for structural-view adequacy
    Function-like wordingA.6.F
    Interface, signature, or module compatibilityA.6.M for module-claim repair and the direct pattern for the interface claim; A.6.5 only when reusable relation-participant typing is needed, and A.6.0 when a signature declaration is being made
    Architecture decisionthe project-side architecture decision pattern when the corresponding claim is being made

    This table is the single boundary for generic non-flow claims. Apply F.19's plausible-reader test before adding a local guard. Relevant candidates include structure-as-architecture, graph-description-as-architecture, flow-as-work-log, crossing-as-gate, valuation-as-score, generated relation-graph proof, and prompt-data-tool flow as authority proof.

    Last Updated: 2026-09-06 — upstream FPF commit 79435b0f (github.com/ailev/FPF)