{"schema_version":1,"assessment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_opportunity320_20260801","source_experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__behavioral_economics","archetype_slug":"computability_boundary_mapping","domain_slug":"behavioral_economics","title":"Scope-Enforced Analysis for Adaptive Behavioral Models","opportunity_summary":"Evaluate whether an unrestricted, exact, terminating behavioral-outcome predictor is formally impossible for one declared adaptive-model language, then route models into enforceable decidable, bounded, or explicit UNKNOWN modes. The opportunity is conditional on both a checked reduction and evidence that behavioral-policy teams actually assert the universal requirement rather than a finite-horizon probabilistic one.","adopter_authorizer":"A joint behavioral-methods and formal-verification review owner could authorize model-analysis modes; accountable policy authorities would retain authority over interventions.","scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":3,"rationale":"Preventing unsupported universal predictions could avert wasted analysis and unjustified behavioral interventions, but the candidate supplies no evidence about how often such requirements arise or the scale of resulting harm."},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":2,"rationale":"Relevant actors are named, but no actual specification, request, adopter commitment, or evidence shows that behavioral-policy teams demand exact class-wide terminating verdicts."},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"Scope checks, decidable fragments, and explicit UNKNOWN outputs would improve on binary timeout-prone simulation if the universal requirement exists, but usefulness and coverage have not been demonstrated."},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":2,"rationale":"The computability-boundary framing differs from calibration-only analysis, but prior art is explicitly unsearched and the proposal may be an archetype-shaped hypothetical rather than a distinct behavioral-economics need."},"technical_implementability":{"score":3,"rationale":"Formalizing one language, checking a reduction, and building a finite-state checker are technically bounded activities, but the required embedding, preservation proof, membership enforcement, termination, and usable coverage remain unestablished."},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":4,"rationale":"The candidate clearly separates authorization of model-analysis modes from intervention authority and names a joint methods and verification review owner, although no real organization has accepted that role."},"evidence_readiness":{"score":2,"rationale":"The central claim remains a hypothesis: no behavioral-language semantics, checked reduction, constructive fragment proof, disclosed corpus results, demand evidence, or prior-art review is supplied."},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":4,"rationale":"Explicit UNKNOWN handling, prohibition on converting timeout to NO, restricted authorization, and rollback rules directly reduce overclaiming risk, though downstream suppression of UNKNOWN remains possible."},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"The routing pattern could extend across formal model families, but proofs and fragment checkers may be language-specific, and complexity or poor restricted-fragment coverage could prevent broad use."}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Formalize one adaptive behavioral language, attempt and independently check one halting reduction, define a finite-state dialect and membership checker, and compare exact, bounded, and UNKNOWN outputs on a small disclosed synthetic corpus.","confidence":"MODERATE","assumptions":["A small interdisciplinary team includes behavioral-modeling and formal-verification expertise.","The test uses synthetic models and no live intervention or sensitive individual data.","Independent proof review and reproducible evaluation are included.","The language and corpus remain narrowly scoped."]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"Turn a validated prototype into a governed analysis service with a robust parser, fragment-membership enforcement, analyzers, routing, output labels, audit records, documentation, and integration with one modeling workflow.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The checked reduction and at least one useful restricted fragment survive first evidence.","Deployment is limited to model analysis and does not automate policy decisions.","One organization and one principal behavioral-model language are in scope.","Security, compliance, and integration requirements are moderate."]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"Validate on a broader disclosed corpus, conduct independent assurance and failure testing, establish review and escalation procedures, train users, and launch the governed workflow for an initial adopter.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["A willing adopter and accountable review owners are available.","UNKNOWN propagation can be audited through downstream outputs.","The restricted analyzer provides enough coverage and performance to justify launch.","No regulated individual-level decision use is permitted."]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Maintain language definitions and analyzers, review model changes, monitor label and UNKNOWN handling, rerun assurance tests, support users, and conduct periodic governance review for one deployment.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The deployment remains limited to one organization and a small number of model dialects.","Major language redesigns or new proof programs are excluded.","Human review remains required for scope changes and policy-facing claims.","No live intervention evaluation is included."]}},"research_burden":"HIGH","earliest_credible_horizon":"3_TO_12_MONTHS","pipeline_gates":{"recognizable_externally_supportable_problem":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The formal problem is coherent, but the sealed candidate contains no external or practice-based evidence that behavioral-policy teams actually request universal exact terminating prediction."},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"The candidate identifies a joint behavioral-methods and formal-verification review owner for model-analysis modes and reserves intervention authority for accountable policy authorities."},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"It makes a falsifiable claim that a declared unrestricted behavioral language admits a halting-preserving encoding while enforceable restricted or bounded modes terminate and label uncertainty more honestly than binary timeout-prone simulation."},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"The authorized synthetic-sandbox step is limited to one language, one independently checked reduction attempt, one finite-state dialect, and a small disclosed comparison corpus."},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"YES","reason":"The first step excludes live interventions and individual decisions, disclaims inference from model correctness to human outcomes, preserves UNKNOWN, and specifies review-triggered stopping and rollback."},"implementation_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The first experiment is scoped sufficiently for a broad band, but deployment costs cannot be supported beyond low-confidence ranges without language complexity, corpus size, integration, compliance, and adopter requirements."}},"blocking_evidence":["Evidence that an actual behavioral-policy specification demands an exact, terminating, class-wide verdict rather than bounded probabilistic estimation.","Declared behavioral-language semantics and a computable source-to-target encoding.","An independently checked proof that target attainment preserves halting, or a failed reduction establishing that this route does not support the claim.","A constructive restricted-fragment definition with enforceable membership, termination, and guarantee labeling.","Results showing useful restricted-mode coverage, performance, and faithful propagation of UNKNOWN on a disclosed corpus.","Evidence that an identified review owner and adopter would use the scoped analysis workflow."],"next_evidence_step":"In a synthetic sandbox, formalize one adaptive behavioral language; attempt an independently checked halting reduction; implement a finite-state membership checker and bounded analyzer; and compare exact, bounded, and UNKNOWN outputs on a small disclosed corpus. Stop advancement if the reduction fails, membership is unenforceable, any promised mode fails to terminate or preserve its label, or the restricted modes provide no useful coverage.","research_questions":["Does any actual behavioral-policy requirement demand an exact, terminating verdict over an unrestricted class of adaptive models?","Can the declared language encode arbitrary computation, and does target attainment preserve halting under a computable mapping?","Can restricted-fragment membership be checked before analysis without accepting out-of-scope models?","What fraction of representative models receives useful exact or bounded results rather than UNKNOWN?","Do all downstream reports preserve UNKNOWN and avoid translating model-level guarantees into claims about people?","How does the scoped approach differ from existing formal verification, reachability, and probabilistic-model analysis once prior art is examined?"],"recommendation":"VALIDATE_PROBLEM_FIRST","uncertainty_constraints":["Closed-book assessment cannot establish problem prevalence, stakeholder demand, market size, prior art, novelty, realized impact, or exact cost.","All impact and advantage judgments are conditional on the existence of a genuine universal exact-prediction requirement.","The candidate does not establish undecidability for any declared behavioral language because no checked encoding or preservation proof is provided.","Formal model results cannot establish psychological validity, welfare effects, or guaranteed human behavior.","Cost bands are resource-equivalent planning ranges based only on the stated scope, not vendor quotes or observed implementations."],"closed_book_prior_art_boundary":"Prior art is explicitly UNSEARCHED. This assessment makes no claim that computability analysis, behavioral-model verification, decidable-fragment routing, or explicit UNKNOWN handling is novel, rare, prevalent, or absent from existing practice."}