The four concept criteria (motivation, no redundancy, no overloading, uniformity) are neither necessary nor sufficient but can explain design flaws.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• A concept should not attempt to serve two distinct purposes; this leads to conflicts and confusion.claim0.800
  No overloading criterion.
• Four Criteria for Judging Conceptsframework0.800
  Framework consisting of Motivation, No Redundancy, No Overloading, and Uniformity criteria to evaluate concept design quality
• A concept should have an articulated purpose; without it, there is no reason from the user’s point of view.claim0.781
  Motivation criterion justification.
• Design and engineering knowledge are not reducible to scientific principles; operational principles are needed.claim0.780
  Polanyi's argument applied to software.
• Two concepts should not have the same purpose; additional concepts for the same purpose create needless complexity.claim0.780
  No redundancy criterion.
• Concepts are not just subjective mental constructs, but are objective features of a system's design: increments of functionality that were consciously introduced by a designer to serve particular purposes.concept0.774
  Central definition from the abstract.
• Our present forms of planning, design, construction, and production are deeply flawed because they do not include step-by-step adaptation and cannot in principle do so as they are.claim0.772
  Sweeping indictment of current production systems.
• The strengths of all three models (concurrent OOP, logic, functional) are irrelevant to parallelism, and generally unhelpful in dealing with process creation and coordination.claim0.770
  Assertion that the popular models add nothing to parallel programming.