Capstone: Construction, Sources, and Error Review

This capstone measures structural accuracy and source discipline. It does not measure speed, intuition, predictive success, or the ability to produce an impressive story.

A passing packet shows that you can construct a palace family, compare records, transfer bounded fields to later work, classify claims by source, and stop when evidence runs out.

What to submit

Your packet contains six parts:

1. one complete sequence construction;
2. one same-element family comparison;
3. one corrupted-table audit;
4. one palace-to-WWG transfer sheet;
5. one six-claim evidence record;
6. one error and stopping-rule reflection.

All line numbers are counted from the bottom.

Task 1: construct a complete family

Start with the Qian head pattern and apply the course’s verified operations in order:

[] → [1] → [1,2] → [1,2,3] → [1,2,3,4] → [1,2,3,4,5] → [1,2,3,5] → [5]

For each position, record:

• the changed-line set relative to the head;
• the resulting hexagram number;
• the position label;
• one mechanical check that could expose an error.

Answer key

Position	Changed-line set	Qian member
Palace head	[]	1
First Generation	[1]	44
Second Generation	[1,2]	33
Third Generation	[1,2,3]	12
Fourth Generation	[1,2,3,4]	20
Fifth Generation	[1,2,3,4,5]	23
Wandering Soul	[1,2,3,5]	35
Returning Soul	[5]	14

A correct answer has eight distinct members in this order. The labels describe catalogue positions; they do not forecast a sequence of events.

Task 2: compare a same-element pair

Compare Qian and Dui without assigning personalities or life scripts.

Check	Qian	Dui
Palace element	Metal	Metal
Head	1	58
Complete sequence	1, 44, 33, 12, 20, 23, 35, 14	58, 47, 45, 31, 39, 15, 62, 54
Shared construction rule	Same eight changed-line sets	Same eight changed-line sets

Write two valid observations and one prohibited inference.

A valid observation compares the element record, head forms, member numbers, or changed-line sets. A prohibited inference assigns the pair an inevitable authority, relationship, psychological, medical, or career pattern.

Task 3: debug the corrupted Kun table

Audit this legacy row:

2, 24, 7, 19, 11, 5, 26, 2

Do not fix it from memory. Apply the line-change operations, then compare the result with the full palace partition.

Answer key

The corrected Kun sequence is:

2, 24, 19, 11, 34, 43, 5, 8

The legacy row:

• imports Hexagrams 7 and 26 from other families;
• duplicates Hexagram 2;
• omits Hexagrams 34, 43, and 8;
• displaces later positions after Hexagram 24.

The polished appearance of the old table did not make it correct. A full cross-family audit must contain sixty-four distinct hexagrams, with no omissions or duplicates.

Task 4: complete a bounded WWG transfer

For the supplied static Hexagram 1 record, fill only these fields:

Field	Answer
Palace	Qian
Palace element	Metal
Palace head	Hexagram 1
Structural position	Palace head
Shi / Ying	Line 6 / line 3
Line 2 relation	Wife/Wealth: Metal controls Wood
Line 4 relation	Officials/Ghosts: Fire controls Metal

Stop there. Do not select a target, add calendar strength, infer a domain, or state an outcome. The Na Jia transfer lesson records why those steps are outside this exercise.

Task 5: classify six claims

For each statement, record its evidence type—direct observation, primary source, secondary source, attributed lineage, UAYA course convention, or unresolved—then decide keep, attribute, research, route, or cut.

Statement	Evidence type and action
“The Qian sequence contains 1, 44, 33, 12, 20, 23, 35, 14.”	Direct observation; keep with the reproducible table. It is also corroborated by the received catalogue.
“The received Qian head entry assigns Metal to Qian.”	Primary source; keep with Jing Shi Yi Zhuan, juan shang, scan image 6. Do not stretch that locator into proof of the course’s complete Six-Relationship convention.
“This named modern scholar dates a development to a stated period.”	Secondary source; keep only with the exact work and page, and attribute the account.
“This named school uses a palace label in a later application.”	Attributed lineage; attribute and do not make it universal.
“The claim-routing matrix is UAYA’s teaching tool.”	UAYA course convention; keep with that boundary stated plainly.
“Wandering Soul must mean crisis before recovery.”	Unresolved; cut. Structural neatness is not evidence of a real-world outcome.

Task 6: write the error review

Answer all four prompts:

1. Which mechanical check found or could have found your first error?
2. Where did you separate a received source claim from a UAYA course convention?
3. Which attractive interpretation did you reject because it lacked evidence?
4. At what exact point did you stop rather than infer?

“I made no errors” is not a useful review. If the construction was correct on the first pass, audit a supplied failure such as the Kun row and explain why it failed.

Pass conditions

A packet passes when:

• all sequence numbers and changed-line sets match the verified record;
• the cross-family partition check yields sixty-four unique hexagrams;
• structural observation, received text, later lineage, and UAYA synthesis are labelled separately;
• the transfer sheet contains no downstream judgment;
• at least one claim is rejected for insufficient evidence;
• the error review names a reproducible check and a valid stopping point.

A correct table followed by an unsupported prediction does not pass.

Where to continue

Use the palace reference when you need a lookup. Use Wen Wang Gua: An Advanced Course when you are ready to study the full chart method. Return to Scope, Later Applications, and Boundaries whenever an application claim outruns its source.

The course ends here because the learner job is complete: construct, verify, source, debug, and stop responsibly.

Sources and verification record

• Received Jing Shi Yi Zhuan (京氏易傳), Sibu Congkan chubian book 43: Qian family catalogue in juan shang, scan images 6–18; Kun family catalogue in juan zhong, scan images 56–69.