Appendix: Chapter 5 Reference Tables
These tables are referenced from Chapter 5 (the standardisation schema). They were relocated from the chapter main text to keep the in-text body within the length band while preserving the full data (no content cut). All figures are census quantities over the serialised SDA Design Standard, reported descriptively with explicit denominators.
Analytical methods (Section 5.4)
The six analytical methods, each targeting a distinct dimension of ambiguity.
| Method | Ambiguity Dimension | Instrument | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Integrity-gate analysis | Referential identity | Duplicate-identifier detection across 611 records | Count of divergent-text duplicates; category distribution |
| Multi-method polysemy protocol | Lexical plurality | Three-method agreement: WordNet inventory, Lesk disambiguation, embedding-context dispersion | Polysemous proportion (descriptive); confidence tiers (strong / moderate / weak) |
| Trigram / POS structural analysis | Clause-role signalling | Part-of-speech trigram extraction across clause classes | Class-conditioned dominant patterns; structural ambiguity exposure by class |
| Deontic-force classification | Normative-force variation | Modal-verb detection and force-type assignment (obligatory, permissive, advisory, prohibitive, mixed) | Force distribution by clause class; mixed-force identification |
| Foundational-mapping coverage | Representational completeness | Term mapping against the stratified entity vocabulary (seven primitives, seven composites) | Coverage ratio; fallback-to-element count; effective coverage by threshold |
| Figures-channel integration | Cross-channel completeness | Triple decomposition, polysemy detection, applicability mapping, bidirectional cross-validation | Channel-specific coverage ratios; figure-only and text-only proportions |
Baseline dimension summary (Section 5.11)
The six empirical-baseline dimensions in compact form.
| Baseline Dimension | Result | Interpretive Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Corpus completeness | 611 text records and 189 figure design requirements; no missing required keys; no truncation hits | Validates that ambiguity findings are not primarily extraction artefacts |
| Referential identity | 8 duplicate identifiers with different text | Identifier-level conflation if the schema uses the nominal clause code alone |
| Lexical plurality | 121 of 204 eligible lemmas polysemous (59.3 percent) | Direct term-to-concept mapping risk |
| Structural signalling | 4,556 trigrams; class-conditioned dominant trigram and POS patterns | Clause-role confusion if context is ignored |
| Representational carry-over | Ontology identifier coverage 30 of 603; modal coverage 9 of 165 | Under-representation in downstream artefacts |
| Cross-channel fragmentation | 75.7 percent of figure design requirements text-absent; 86.4 percent of text design requirements figure-absent | A schema on one channel alone misses most of the other channel’s content |
Modal-operator frequency distribution (Section 5.14)
Six modal operators across four force categories; 164 modal clauses of 611 total (modal rate 0.2684).
| Modal Operator | Force Category | Corpus Frequency |
|---|---|---|
shall |
obligatory | 140 |
must |
obligatory | 3 |
should |
advisory | 4 |
may |
permissive | 16 |
can |
permissive | 13 |
could |
permissive | 4 |
shall not |
prohibitive | 4 |
Polysemy confidence tiers (Section 5.14)
Cross-method agreement assigns confidence tiers over the 204 eligible lemmas.
| Tier | Agreement | Interpretation | Count in corpus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strong | 3/3 methods agree on polysemous status | High confidence that the term carries multiple senses in this corpus | 24 |
| Moderate | 2/3 methods agree | Probable polysemy; one method diverges | 97 |
| Weak | 1/3 methods flags polysemy | Possible polysemy; insufficient cross-method support | residual |
Design Science Research iteration register (Section 5.8)
Nine documented DSR iterations (0–7b) across four analytical cycles; the design-search history behind the standardisation schema (visualised in the Design Science Research iteration history for the standardisation schema figure).
| Iteration | Intent | Key Change | Key Finding | Design Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Corpus integrity | Assembled 611 clause records | 8 duplicate IDs with divergent text | Flag duplicate IDs as a mandatory schema constraint |
| 1 | Polysemy baseline | Three-method polysemy protocol | 121 of 204 eligible lemmas polysemous | Schema must carry explicit ambiguity profiles |
| 2 | Schema design | Five-layer contract specification | All five failure modes addressed by design | Schema accepted as decision-complete |
| 3 | Reproducibility | Full rerun on a fresh environment | 5-lemma drift after model correction | Environment metadata made mandatory; drift within bounds |
| 4 | Multi-angle deepening | Five new analytical angles | Residuals tail-concentrated; ambiguity role-dependent | Claim refined to governed ambiguity management |
| 5 | Deontic force | Modal-verb and force-type analysis | 164 modal clauses; force is class-conditioned | modality_profile field justified |
| 6 | Ambiguity-delta | Five-dimensional profiler | Overall delta 0.2514; design_requirement delta 0.5696 |
Dual-mode contribution boundary established |
| 7 | Figures integration | Five-analysis pipeline on 189 figure DRs | 75.7 percent of figure DRs have no text equivalent | Two-channel architecture confirmed necessary |
| 7b | Figures parity | Deontic, delta, and cross-validation on figures | Figures delta 0.9148; channels complementary | Asymmetric completeness verified |