{"schema_version":1,"assessment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_opportunity320_20260801","source_experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__performing_arts_theatre","archetype_slug":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management","domain_slug":"performing_arts_theatre","title":"Governed lifecycle management for theatre production artifacts","opportunity_summary":"Test whether class-specific status, disposition, quarantine, and restoration controls can reduce wrong-version selection and handover burden while preserving artistic, safety, rights, and reconstruction records. The candidate is operationally coherent and safely testable, but problem prevalence, stakeholder demand, comparative benefit, and differentiation from existing theatre and archival practice remain unverified.","adopter_authorizer":"A consenting theatre production, with the production manager and stage manager governing operational copies under delegated policy and creators, designers, rights holders, records officers, safeguarding leads, and archivists authorizing treatment of protected materials and exceptions.","scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":4,"rationale":"If the stated ambiguity is present, reducing obsolete blocking, cue, design, and safety-instruction use could materially improve production reliability and handovers while avoiding loss of artistic provenance and evidentiary records; actual incidence and magnitude are unmeasured."},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":3,"rationale":"The proposal names multiple affected parties and recognizable workflow harms, but the sealed candidate contains no interviews, adoption requests, purchasing signals, or evidence that theatres prioritize lifecycle governance over competing needs."},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"Dependency gates, exception revalidation, reversible quarantine, successor markers, and restore testing plausibly add value beyond the centralized-show-bible rival, but no comparison shows that they outperform ordinary version control and manual archive transfer or justify added workload."},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":2,"rationale":"The integrated design is detailed, but prior-art status is explicitly UNSEARCHED and the packet identifies unresolved overlap with prompt-book governance, production archives, records schedules, and theatre collection workflows."},"technical_implementability":{"score":4,"rationale":"Inventory, labeling, audit logs, soft quarantine, tiered archiving, and restore drills can plausibly be implemented with ordinary records and collaboration tooling; identity resolution across drives, messages, consoles, paper, and informal copies remains a practical complication."},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"Operational authority and protected-material authority are explicitly allocated, and a consent-based trial is possible, but each production may require coordination among managers, creators, rights holders, safeguarding personnel, records staff, and archivists."},"evidence_readiness":{"score":4,"rationale":"The packet supplies a bounded six-week shadow trial, a named centralized-show-bible comparator, observable outcome measures, separate problem and intervention falsifiers, and explicit halt criteria; baseline instrumentation and thresholds still require agreement."},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":4,"rationale":"Owner-approved soft quarantine, archive copies, successor markers, audit logs, restoration tests, distributed exceptions, and rollback directly protect against irreversible deletion and lost context, although access consolidation and mandatory-destruction conflicts require validation."},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"The lifecycle pattern could recur across productions and departments, but heterogeneous artifact classes, rights, retention duties, informal channels, archival values, and local workflows limit confidence that one policy or implementation will transfer cleanly."}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"One consenting production; one bounded artifact set inventoried for six weeks; current and superseded labels; shadow disposition recommendations; archive and restore test; owner-approved soft quarantine only; comparison of baseline or centralized-show-bible performance on selection, search, status, workload, and harm measures.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The artifact set is bounded and accessible without extensive digitization.","Existing storage and collaboration systems can support labels, logs, and reversible quarantine.","The band includes production staff time, records or archival consultation, coordination, access review, and evaluation.","No custom enterprise software or hard deletion is included."]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Configure an initial production-level lifecycle system after favorable evidence, including artifact taxonomy, authority matrix, retention and exception rules, permissions, workflow integration, training, migration of active materials, audit logging, and restoration procedures.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Deployment covers one theatre organization or production program rather than a large multi-venue network.","Existing repositories can be configured or modestly integrated.","Legal, rights, safeguarding, records, and archival review is required but no major litigation or bespoke preservation program occurs.","Substantial manual classification and identity resolution are included."]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Launch governed lifecycle operations across the participating production departments, including live support, exception handling, quality checks, remediation of informal copies, restore drills, and outcome monitoring during the first operating cycle.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Several departments and mixed digital and paper artifacts are in scope.","Launch includes staff backfill and workflow support during adoption.","No organization-wide replacement of production-management, console, or storage platforms is required.","Protected materials remain subject to owner-specific approval."]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Recurring policy administration, artifact review, exception revalidation, storage and preservation services, access audits, training, restore drills, and periodic evaluation for a small-to-mid-sized participating organization.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["The organization reuses the taxonomy and workflows across productions.","Recurring work is primarily fractional staff effort plus existing-platform costs.","Archive volume and specialist preservation needs remain moderate.","Major migrations, rights disputes, and custom software redevelopment are excluded."]}},"research_burden":"MODERATE","earliest_credible_horizon":"0_TO_3_MONTHS","pipeline_gates":{"recognizable_externally_supportable_problem":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The packet gives a concrete observable state, consequences, and a problem falsifier, but supplies no external or scoped empirical evidence that duplication, ambiguous authority, stale operational use, and unreliable retention ownership occur materially in a candidate production."},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"A consenting production is an identifiable adopter; production and stage managers can govern operational copies, while named creators, rights holders, records officers, safeguarding leads, and archivists retain authority over protected materials and exceptions."},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The candidate claims that class-specific lifecycle controls, compared with a centralized current-show bible and conventional version control, will reduce wrong-version selection, search time, and unresolved status without causing restore failure, lost context, rights conflict, or excessive workload."},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"The authorized six-week inventory and shadow-disposition study is limited to one production and one artifact set, uses archive copies and restoration testing, and permits only owner-approved soft quarantine."},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"YES","reason":"The candidate excludes hard deletion, hold overrides, content changes, and access expansion; it assigns distributed authority and requires halt and rollback for disputes, safety discrepancies, missing dependencies, workflow disruption, access expansion, or failed restoration."},"implementation_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"YES","reason":"A staged scope can be bounded around one artifact set and then one organization, and broad resource-equivalent ranges can include labor, coordination, permissions, storage, preservation, training, integration, and evaluation despite low cost confidence."}},"blocking_evidence":["A scoped audit establishing whether duplication, ambiguous authority, stale operational use, and unreliable retention ownership are material in a consenting production.","Comparative evidence against the centralized-show-bible rival on wrong-version selections, search time, unresolved-current-status cases, workload, and pre-agreed harm thresholds.","Evidence that artifact owners and dependencies can be resolved sufficiently for status and disposition decisions without suppressing intentional creative plurality.","Successful restoration and context-recovery tests across the selected artifact classes, including confirmation that consolidation does not expand unauthorized access.","Prior-art research comparing the integrated proposal with established prompt-book, production-management, records-schedule, digital-archive, and theatre-collection workflows.","Adopter inquiry showing that responsible managers and protected-material authorities will participate and can sustain the recurring governance burden."],"next_evidence_step":"With one production's consent, audit one bounded artifact set for six weeks and operate lifecycle labeling and disposition recommendations in shadow mode. Compare measured wrong-version selections, search time, unresolved-current-status cases, and staff workload with the production's centralized-show-bible or current-practice workflow; retain archive copies, perform restoration tests, and allow only owner-approved soft quarantine. Stop or reject the intervention if the problem falsifier is met, outcomes do not improve beyond pre-agreed thresholds, workload exceeds its threshold, or any restore failure, lost context, rights conflict, access expansion, disputed authority, or safety discrepancy occurs.","research_questions":["How often are current versions genuinely ambiguous, and how often are superseded artifacts used operationally within the bounded production?","Which harms arise from artifact lifecycle failure rather than training, communication, informal-channel use, or late artistic changes?","What lifecycle, prompt-book, version-control, records, and archival practices already address the proposed mechanisms?","Which artifact classes require distinct retention, destruction, rights, safeguarding, evidentiary, or artistic-provenance rules?","Can owners, successors, dependencies, and holds be resolved with acceptable effort and disagreement rates?","Do status labels change selection behavior when staff continue using messaging threads, personal folders, consoles, and paper binders?","Does the intervention outperform the centralized-show-bible rival without exceeding workload or workflow-disruption thresholds?","Can quarantined and archived materials be restored with their context, permissions, dependencies, and usable formats intact?","What organization size, production cadence, and artifact volume would move startup or recurring costs into a higher band?","Will production managers, creators, rights holders, safeguarding leads, records staff, and archivists authorize and maintain the governance model?"] ,"recommendation":"PARTNERED_RESEARCH","uncertainty_constraints":["Closed-book assessment: no claim is made about prevalence, market size, realized impact, or current theatre practice.","Prior art is unsearched, so originality and competitive differentiation cannot be established.","Cost bands are resource-equivalent planning ranges with low confidence because artifact volume, organization size, systems, digitization needs, and compliance duties are unspecified.","Theatre drafts and discarded alternatives may retain artistic or scholarly value independent of operational currency.","Benefits depend on staff honoring labels and governed repositories despite informal copies and embodied knowledge.","Distributed rights, safeguarding, records, and archival authority may constrain disposition or make governance burdensome.","The six-week horizon can produce initial operational evidence but cannot establish long-term preservation quality or remounting value."],"closed_book_prior_art_boundary":"No external search was performed. The candidate discloses UNSEARCHED prior-art status, so this assessment does not claim novelty, rarity, market whitespace, or superiority over existing theatre production-management, prompt-book, records-management, digital-preservation, or archival workflows."}