{"schema_version":1,"assessment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_opportunity320_20260801","source_experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"invariant_mode_decomposition_design__statistics_experimental_design","archetype_slug":"invariant_mode_decomposition_design","domain_slug":"statistics_experimental_design","title":"Modal-risk experimental allocation for persistent multivariate process drift","opportunity_summary":"Evaluate whether allocating randomized process perturbations toward reachable, risk-weighted persistent modes detects or estimates consequential joint response drift more precisely than an equal-sized D-optimal design in the original control coordinates. The proposal is measurable and safety-bounded, but the existence of the problem in a target process, comparative advantage, estimability with 24 batches, and distinctiveness remain unproven.","adopter_authorizer":"The process owner and safety/quality engineer would jointly authorize adoption or experiments; the experimental-design statistician would control randomization and analysis but could not waive operating limits.","scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":4,"rationale":"If the hypothesized failure occurs, promoting a setting that amplifies persistent joint quality drift could compromise estimation, quality, or safety. Impact is potentially substantial, but occurrence, frequency, and realized harm are unsupported in the sealed candidate."},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":3,"rationale":"Process owners, safety/quality engineers, statisticians, operators, and exposed customers have identifiable interests in preventing concealed drift, but the packet supplies no demand evidence, adoption inquiry, accepted weighting scheme, or demonstrated prevalence."},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"The proposal makes a clear incremental claim against an equal-sized full-matrix D-optimal design: improved precision or detection for a preregistered persistent-risk contrast. The strongest countercase is equally explicit, and no comparative result yet favors modal allocation."},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"Risk-weighted allocation to reachable persistent modes is a coherent differentiator from fitting A and B in original coordinates, but prior-art status is explicitly unsearched and world novelty cannot be inferred closed-book."},"technical_implementability":{"score":3,"rationale":"A local A and B fit, decomposition, randomized contrasts, held-out checks, and rollback are technically specified. Feasibility remains uncertain because state dimension, control dimension, lag order, effect sizes, reachability, matrix recovery, and mode stability are not established for 24 batches."},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":4,"rationale":"The candidate names the joint decision authorities, limits the statistician's authority, confines testing to certified ranges, and supplies quarantine, stopping, and rollback rules. Actual organizational approval and willingness are not evidenced."},"evidence_readiness":{"score":3,"rationale":"The baseline, nearest rival, equal-batch comparison, problem falsifier, intervention falsifier, held-out checks, and stopping rules support a decision-relevant study. Readiness is constrained by the absent operating-characteristic analysis, discovery-confirmation allocation, transient-amplification criterion, and accepted risk weights."},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":4,"rationale":"The method could add a guard against joint persistent drift that marginal endpoint analyses miss, with residual, spectral-gap, instability, quality-limit, quarantine, and rollback protections. Benefit depends on stable reachable modes and adequate treatment of nonlinear or non-normal dynamics."},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"The analysis and comparison framework could be reused across repeated multivariate processes, but each application requires local A and B estimation, sufficient batches and sensors, process-specific constraints, validated risk weights, and repeated stability checks."}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"A preregistered simulation-based operating-characteristic study for the intended state, control, and lag dimensions, comparing modal-risk and original-coordinate D-optimal allocation at 24 batches.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["No live production batches are included in this step.","Existing personnel can provide plausible parameter ranges and operating constraints.","Cost consists mainly of statistician, process-engineer, safety-review, simulation, and reporting labor.","No proprietary data-access purchase or new computing infrastructure is required."]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Preparation and execution of the proposed 24-batch, low-amplitude randomized crossover on one process, including protocol review, batch handling, analysis, held-out confirmation, and quarantine procedures.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Existing multivariate sensors and certified control infrastructure are usable.","Batch opportunity cost is material but not exceptionally high.","Experimental product is not released unless it meets existing requirements.","The study remains within one line or closely bounded process and requires no new major equipment."]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"Controlled incorporation on one production line after favorable evidence, including validated software, data integration, operating procedures, training, quality-system documentation, confirmation runs, and governance approval.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Launch means decision support and monitored experimental design, not autonomous control.","Existing control hardware and quality sensors remain adequate.","Regulated validation or prolonged line downtime could move the resource requirement outside this band.","Expansion to multiple sites or product families is excluded."]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"One-line annual operation covering monitoring, periodic refits, confirmation batches, drift and transient-gain checks, software maintenance, review of risk weights, and statistician/process/quality oversight.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The process requires several reviews or experimental cycles per year.","No major sensor replacement or plant-wide rollout is included.","Local A and B models require periodic rather than continuous revalidation.","Existing staff perform part of the recurring work."]}},"research_burden":"HIGH","earliest_credible_horizon":"3_TO_12_MONTHS","pipeline_gates":{"recognizable_externally_supportable_problem":{"status":"YES","reason":"The candidate defines a recognizable and externally testable discrepancy: acceptable marginal estimates alongside repeatable persistent joint movement, with falsification by negligible cross-coordinate dynamics, approximately diagonal A, and accurate marginal trajectory predictions. Its actual prevalence remains unknown."},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"The process owner and safety/quality engineer are explicitly assigned joint approval authority, while the statistician has bounded design and analysis authority."},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"At equal batch count, modal-risk allocation is claimed to improve precision or detection of a preregistered persistent-risk contrast relative to a full-matrix D-optimal design in original coordinates; failure to improve falsifies the intervention."},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A finite operating-characteristic study can compare both allocations at the stated 24-batch budget and stop progression if matrix recovery, mode stability, residual, reachability, precision, or detection criteria fail, without live deployment."},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"YES","reason":"The packet confines any later pilot to certified ranges, identifies joint authority, prohibits release of nonconforming product and unreviewed automation, and specifies halting, quarantine, and rollback. No live pilot is authorized by this assessment."},"implementation_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"A one-process scope supports broad conditional bands, but batch cost, dimensions, sensor readiness, integration burden, validation requirements, downtime, and rollout scale are absent, so external scoping is needed before the range is decision-grade."}},"blocking_evidence":["No target-process evidence yet establishes consequential cross-coordinate persistence or failure of marginal models.","Operating characteristics for recovering A and B, selecting stable modes, and estimating the persistent-risk contrast with 24 batches are absent.","No equal-batch result shows better precision or detection than the original-coordinate D-optimal rival.","Reachability through B, resampling stability, spectral separation, and held-out residual performance have not been demonstrated.","Finite-horizon transient amplification from a non-normal A lacks a preregistered acceptance or allocation rule.","Ownership and sensitivity of the risk-weighted outcome priorities are unresolved.","Prior art and practical distinctiveness are unsearched."],"next_evidence_step":"Preregister and run a bounded simulation-based operating-characteristic study over the intended state dimension, control dimension, lag order, effect sizes, non-normality, and drift regimes. Compare modal-risk allocation with the original-coordinate D-optimal rival at the same 24-batch budget, using separate selection and confirmation samples; do not advance to the live pilot if modal allocation fails to improve preregistered contrast precision or detection, or if matrix recovery, reachability, mode-stability, transient-gain, residual, or spectral-gap gates fail.","research_questions":["Do target-process data show material cross-coordinate persistence, and do marginal models fail the preregistered joint-trajectory tolerance?","Under intended dimensions and effect sizes, can 24 batches recover A and B and provide a defensible discovery-confirmation split?","Does modal-risk allocation improve persistent-risk contrast precision or detection over the equal-sized full-matrix D-optimal rival?","Are consequential modes reachable through B and stable across resamples, refits, held-out batches, and defensible risk-weight sets?","Does non-normal transient amplification identify hazardous directions that eigenvalue-based persistence would miss?","How do nonlinearities, rapid regime shifts, sensor error, or model misspecification affect residual and reuse gates?","Is the allocation approach distinct from existing multivariate dynamic and optimal-design methods, and would the named authorities adopt it if validated?","What are the process-specific batch, integration, compliance, downtime, and recurring-governance costs? "],"recommendation":"PARTNERED_RESEARCH","uncertainty_constraints":["Closed-book assessment: no external evidence was used.","Problem prevalence, stakeholder demand, market size, realized impact, and world novelty are unmeasured.","The candidate is a hypothesis with unsearched prior art and no comparative empirical result.","The fixed 24-batch proposal is not justified against state dimension, control dimension, lag order, effect size, or desired error rates.","Local eigenmodes may be misleading under strong nonlinearity, regime change, or consequential non-normal transient growth.","Risk-weighted priorities may be disputed and may change the selected allocation.","Cost bands are resource-equivalent assumptions for a bounded one-line scope, not quotations or point estimates.","Any production experiment still requires actual process-owner and safety/quality approval."],"closed_book_prior_art_boundary":"The packet labels prior art UNSEARCHED and supplies no external comparison beyond its constructed nearest rival. This assessment therefore makes no claim about novelty, prevalence, existing implementations, intellectual-property position, or superiority to methods outside the sealed candidate."}