In the specific category of tadlis al-isnad, the narrator is known to have met the cited teacher; the question is whether this particular report was heard. In mursal khafi, the two are contemporaries but did not meet or direct contact has not been established by the relevant investigation.
First case: Ahmad met Khalid and heard other reports, but cites an unreceived report as “from Khalid”: a tadlis al-isnad pattern.
Second case: Ahmad and Khalid lived in the same era but never met, yet Ahmad cites him with “from Khalid”: a hidden irsal pattern.
Some definitions broaden tadlis to include mere contemporaneity, conflating the categories. A more precise technical distinction rests on whether a meeting actually occurred.
Historical illustration: Direct prophetic attributions by mukhadram narrators such as Abū ʿUthmān al-Nahdī and Qays ibn Abī Ḥāzim are treated under irsal, not tadlis al-isnad, because a meeting with the Prophet ﷺ is not established.