Foundational Primitive Mapping Coverage

This appendix documents the foundational primitive mapping coverage achieved in Chapter 5 of the thesis. The mapping operation assigns each high-frequency term in the standards representation corpus to one of fifteen foundational spatial-semantic primitives. Complete coverage at the selected frequency threshold was achieved, but the distribution across primitives reveals a pattern of residual conceptual burden that must be interpreted alongside the aggregate coverage figure.

The coverage ratio of 1.0000 confirms that every term at or above the selected frequency threshold received a primitive assignment. This result is an artefact of the foundational abstraction discipline: the primitive set was designed to be collectively exhaustive at the level of spatial semantics, and element was designated as the catch-all primitive for built-component terms that could not be assigned to a more specific category with adequate confidence. The fallback-to-element count of 54 directly expresses this residual burden. Of the 204 mapped terms, 54 — approximately one quarter — were assigned to element not because their semantic content was unambiguous but because no more specific primitive could be justified under the confidence requirements of the schema. High coverage and meaningful residual uncertainty therefore coexist in this dataset. In summary, the mapping coverage profile confirms that the schema achieves complete assignment at the selected threshold while concentrating adjudication pressure in the element primitive, and this establishes the basis for the dual-reporting norm that Chapter 5 adopts throughout its evaluation.

Primitive Inventory

The fifteen candidate terms considered in the mapping are listed in the Standards Serialisation Schema Specification appendix. Following ablation analysis in Chapter 5, the zone term was removed from the operative set — on the cognitive account a composite (space bounded by boundary) whose work the space primitive and the bounded_by operator already carry — reducing the inventory to the fourteen entity terms (seven primitives and seven composites) used in the final schema. The ablation result is documented in the schema specification appendix, where information-loss scores justify each retained and removed term.

Interpretation

Three interpretive principles govern the use of this coverage profile across the thesis. First, coverage alone is not a sufficient semantic quality claim. A coverage ratio of 1.0000 is expected given the design of the foundational primitive set and does not constitute evidence that every assignment is semantically precise. Second, residual load must be reported alongside coverage. The fallback-to-element count of 54 is the critical figure for understanding where adjudication pressure accumulates in the corpus and where schema governance is most exposed to approximation. Third, primitive assignment must preserve ambiguity visibility. Where term-level confidence is limited, the schema contract requires that ambiguity indicators be retained at the row level rather than suppressed by a nominal coverage claim.

These principles underpin the dual-reporting norm adopted in Chapter 5: coverage and residual burden are always stated together, and the combination is interpreted as evidence about schema governance quality rather than as a simple accuracy score. Overall, these three interpretive principles apply to every coverage claim in the thesis: completeness figures are always read alongside the fallback count, ambiguity visibility is maintained at row level, and no coverage claim is advanced as an accuracy claim without declaring the residual burden that accompanies it. Therefore, the mapping coverage data documented here functions as an integrity baseline for interpreting the ambiguity-delta and primitive-assignment results in the companion evaluation appendices.