The boundary

capture state V→compute D→state advances→compare applicability
I55

Integrity + provenance does not imply current applicability.

I56

Adoption binds the input state that justified computation.

I57

State advance after input capture is an applicability transition.

I58

Stale-but-valid artifact requires revalidation, recomputation or explicit domain proof before consequence.

Canonical path

CAPTURE INPUT STATE / VERSION / SNAPSHOT
↓
COMPUTE ARTIFACT
↓
VERIFY INTEGRITY + PROVENANCE
↓
OBSERVE CURRENT AUTHORITATIVE STATE
↓
COMPARE APPLICABILITY
├─ compatible → ADOPT
└─ mismatch / unknown → REVALIDATE / RECOMPUTE / HOLD
↓
COMMIT WITH CURRENT AUTHORITY
↓
PROVE INPUT → ARTIFACT → APPLICABILITY → EFFECT

Version + snapshot identity

Verified #024 also changed state content while deliberately retaining the same logical version. Snapshot identity still changed and adoption was rejected. Version numbers are useful, but materially different input states need a sufficiently strong identity or equivalent domain precondition.

Not strict equality everywhere

Some domains can prove that an artifact remains applicable across selected state changes. TTP does not prohibit that. It requires the compatibility rule itself to be explicit, testable and preserved in evidence.

Open Verified Report #024