'The same or an allied field' — how I thought about this for my judging evidence

Had judging experience in a field adjacent to, but not identical to, my primary claimed area of expertise, and had to think through whether it genuinely qualified as "the same or an allied field" under the judging criterion. What helped me think about this: whether the judging activity drew on genuinely related expertise — could I credibly evaluate the work using the same underlying knowledge and judgment that makes me qualified in my primary field, or was it a genuinely separate skill set that happened to share a broad label. In my case, the adjacent field shared enough underlying technical foundation that I felt the connection was real and defensible, not a stretch. I made sure to explain this connection explicitly in my petition rather than assuming it was self-evident — a brief explanation of how the allied field relates to my primary claimed expertise, so a reviewer isn't left to guess whether the connection is genuine or just convenient.