Reported
The light is not illuminating. Circuit 2 appears ON and is not visibly tripped.
TA-14 ADMISSIBLE ARCHITECTURE · PUBLIC SHOWROOM
ACA asks whether computation has standing. AEA asks whether its result has standing to become consequence. The ONUMA/BIMgenie LT-2 case shows both boundaries operating against an externally generated work order without inventing the physical state the record does not establish.
ONE CONTINUOUS GOVERNANCE HANDOFF
Each architecture retains its own role. The case demonstrates their connection without collapsing model evidence, operational records, or physical reality into one claim.
Tests whether a bounded computational proposal has sufficient standing before resources are committed.
Enter the ACA showroom →Tests whether evidence, identity, continuity, authority, and present conditions support the proposed consequence.
Open the AEA record →A real occupant-to-facility-manager-to-technician workflow showing why represented topology and operational assignment do not manufacture physical truth.
Inspect the evidence boundary →THE PROOF IS THE RESTRAINT
A successful governance result is not always execution. In LT-2, the represented path earned bounded computational support and the assignment earned bounded investigation authority. Physical electrical intervention remained HOLD.
EVIDENCE CLASSES MUST NOT COLLAPSE
The light is not illuminating. Circuit 2 appears ON and is not visibly tripped.
The frozen semantic model supports a bounded upstream electrical relationship associated with LT-2.
The BIMgenie assignment supports bounded, non-intervention investigation.
Present energized state, physical topology, defect, repair authority, intervention, or outcome.
Live cumulative activity recorded across the public Exchange surface.