This record contains version 0.5 of the Epsilon–Theta (ET) Framework Reader’s Guide. The Reader’s Guide is a non-normative, human-facing entry point to the ET Framework document suite. It explains the purpose, structure, and intended interpretation of the ET Framework without replacing the normative documents. The ET Framework is a baseline-relative residual, diagnostic, and sensitivity-reporting framework for finite Bell scenarios. It is designed to help describe declared observable departures from an explicit baseline probability model, including static residual structure and temporal or order-dependent diagnostics, under declared calibration and reporting protocols. This guide explains how the ET Framework Meta-Specification, the ET-CS-222 scenario pack, and the ET-CS-222 companion supplements fit together. It also clarifies what ET is and is not: ET is not a new physical theory, not a new Bell inequality, and not a replacement for Bell-valid significance analyses, loophole-specific experimental audits, device-independent security proofs, or quantum-set compatibility tools. Instead, ET is intended as a complementary layer for baseline-relative residual, temporal, and sensitivity reporting. The guide is intended for readers who want to understand the ET document suite before reading the formal Meta-Specification or the scenario-specific ET-CS-222 documents. It summarizes the residual-first principle, the epsilon/theta split, the role of scenario packs, the meaning of non-detection statements, the relation to existing Bell-analysis tools, and the recommended order for reading the ET documents. This Reader’s Guide refers to two separately published ET records: 1. The ET Framework Meta-Specification v0.5, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20472966.2. The ET-CS-222 Scenario Pack and Companion Supplements v0.7, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20474207. This release should be cited when referring specifically to the reader-facing overview and explanatory entry point to the ET Framework document suite. The Meta-Specification and ET-CS-222 package should be cited separately when referring to the normative framework-level contract or the canonical 2x2x2 scenario-pack specification.
Azat Ahmedov (Sun,) studied this question.