抱有 vs 摆有: When does a serial verb become a word? 保有财产 ; 抱有好感 ; 怀有敌意 ; 育有一子

Bi-syllabic verbal compounds like these (in bold) are words: they form a lexical unit; they are used as independent lexemes; they are lexicographically counted as lemmas/entries in all dictionaries.

桌上摆有一卷书 ; 屋中堆有一百袋大米 ;  庭中种有几棵树 ; 车上坐有四人

Bi-syllabic verbal compounds like these, however, are not recorded as words in any dictionary, although they are similarly-formed and otherwise unexceptional. When pressed, people describe them as just normal instances of serial verb constructions - but are they really?
Syntactically, they seem perfectly good candidates for word-hood, and yet they're not. So I wonder:

Are there any lexicographical/grammatical criteria we can use to explain why that second set of compounds (and other compounds like them) are to be excluded from word-hood?
Leaving aside academic criteria, how would any native-level Chinese speaker here describe their intuitive feeling about those non-dictionary words (摆有, 堆有, 种有, 坐有, etc)?

Do they strike you as creatively constructed phrases?

If so, do you compose them each time afresh, perhaps in agreement with any preceding noun? (For example, thinking of 庭+有树 and deciding to add in 种 to clarify how the tree are in the courtyard or thinking about 车+有人 and deciding to add in 坐 to clarify how the people are in the car)?


If not: Do they strike you as normal compound words that you pick in your head as a unit, no different to other frequently-used words like 抱有 or 保有?

If so, does it surprise you that all dictionaries list words like 持有, 保有, 抱有 and 育有 but no dictionary lists words like 摆有, 坐有, 种有 and 堆有? How would you explain this fact?
Most of the examples listed are based on a special function of the verb 有 (possess) to follow and bond with another verb to form a tightly-bound term. In linguistic terms, it is called a serial verb compound.
Some serial verb compounds like 抱有(e.g 抱有大志)，擁有(e.g. 擁有巨大財富) and 藏有(e.g. 藏有毒品) became compound words because they are very commonly used and people treat them as such.
Since 有 can bond with so many verbs, it is simpler to group all these possible serial verb compounds under the function of 有 than list each and every possible pair as an independent compound word
Similarly. Not all [verb + result complement] is listed as an independent compound word, but the common ones do
Example:
走避; 走失 (compound words)
走掉, 走上，走入，走出  (verb + result complement)
We do not list 走掉, 走上，走入，走出  as compound words, they are all under 走's ability to bond with a result complement