{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__biology_ecology","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"archetype_slug":"computability_boundary_mapping","domain_slug":"biology_ecology","decision":"CANDIDATE","problem_id":"universal_long_run_ecosystem_outcome_prediction","causal_lever_id":"model_relative_solvability_and_fallback_boundary","proposal":{"problem":"Ecology programs may seek a universally correct, always-terminating analyzer that determines whether a focal species eventually becomes extinct, persists, or reaches a stable regime in every ecosystem model admitted by an open-ended modeling language. Simulation success, timeout, and theorem analogies do not establish whether that class-wide guarantee is achievable.","actors_substrate":["ecological modelers and software teams","conservation decision-makers","rule-based, agent-based, and dynamical ecosystem models","communities affected by conservation actions","modeled species and ecosystems"],"observable_state":"Model outputs collapse counterexample, false, timeout, numerical failure, out-of-scope, and unresolved into authoritative extinction or persistence labels; the supported model class and guarantee are undocumented.","consequence":"Management decisions can rely on false certainty, while engineering effort is spent pursuing an unsupported universal predictor or prematurely abandoning useful restricted predictors.","affected_objective":"Produce scientifically faithful, auditable long-run ecological forecasts with guarantees matched to the model class and evidence.","structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"open-ended input class","domain_realization":"All ecosystem models expressible in an extensible rule or simulation language, rather than one fixed finite model.","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"},{"archetype_element":"universal exact terminating decision","domain_realization":"For every admitted model and initial condition, return a correct eventual-extinction, persistence, or stability verdict and halt.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"computability boundary","domain_realization":"Separate unrestricted models from enforceable finite-state or bounded-horizon ecological fragments.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"impossibility evidence","domain_realization":"A property-preserving encoding from a known undecidable source would be required before declaring the unrestricted ecological question undecidable.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"honest fallback","domain_realization":"Return fragment-qualified exact results, sound one-sided results, or UNKNOWN without treating elapsed simulation time as a biological negative.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"}],"component_map":[{"component":"Problem-Class Specification","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Define the ecological outcome property and admitted model family."},{"component":"Instance Representation Contract","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Version model syntax, parameters, initial conditions, and outcome encoding."},{"component":"Computation Model Contract","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Declare arithmetic, randomness, precision, oracle data, and interaction assumptions."},{"component":"Solvability Guarantee Profile","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Distinguish total decision, one-sided recognition, bounded decision, and approximation."},{"component":"Quantifier and Scope Map","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Separate every-model claims from claims about a model, horizon, or parameter set."},{"component":"Computability Status Lattice","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Classify each model fragment as decidable, recognizable, relative, or unresolved."},{"component":"Constructive Procedure Witness","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Provide an exact fragment solver with correctness and termination arguments."},{"component":"Reduction Preservation Contract","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Require a total computable encoding preserving the ecological outcome predicate."},{"component":"Computability Impossibility Certificate","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Retain a checked reduction if unrestricted impossibility is established."},{"component":"Assumption Register","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Record closure, observability, determinism, precision, and encoding assumptions."},{"component":"Decidable Subclass Map","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Map finite-state, bounded-population, and bounded-horizon fragments."},{"component":"One-Sided Recognition Contract","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Specify which ecological outcomes can receive witness-backed confirmation."},{"component":"Unknown and Nontermination Policy","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Keep UNKNOWN, timeout, failure, and biological NO distinct."},{"component":"Fallback Solution Contract","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Route models to exact, sound-abstract, bounded, or escalated analysis."},{"component":"Computability Guarantee Record","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Version the shipped claim and its proof or residual uncertainty."},{"component":"Recheck Trigger","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Reassess after language, outcome, precision, or external-data changes."},{"component":"Termination Condition","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Declare proof-backed termination or explicit resource bounds."},{"component":"Scope Boundary","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Mechanically identify models covered by each guarantee."},{"component":"Decision Record","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Record the chosen boundary, fallback, evidence, and accountable owner."},{"component":"Uncertainty Residue","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"List unproved obligations and ecological model-reality gaps."},{"component":"Independent Proof Review","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Have an independent reviewer check formal claims and encodings."},{"component":"Complexity Follow-On Gate","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Assess cost only after establishing in-principle decidability."}],"mechanism_dispositions":[{"slug":"abstract_interpretation_or_model_checking","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Use sound finite over-approximations for selected ecological transition models; qualify verdict direction.","counterfactual_removal":"The proposal loses a sound fallback beyond exactly enumerable fragments."},{"slug":"bounded_domain_exhaustive_search","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"TEST_DESIGN","adaptation_or_rejection":"Exhaustively check small populations, state spaces, and horizons in the pilot.","counterfactual_removal":"The first test loses its complete within-bound reference result."},{"slug":"computability_boundary_decision_record","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Version the model boundary, guarantee, assumptions, and triggers.","counterfactual_removal":"Guarantees can drift silently after model-language changes."},{"slug":"computational_complexity_analysis","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Evaluate scaling only for fragments proved decidable.","counterfactual_removal":"Computability could be mistaken for usable ecological performance."},{"slug":"constructive_algorithm_and_correctness_proof","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Establish the exact finite-fragment solver and its termination.","counterfactual_removal":"The decidable region would lack a positive witness."},{"slug":"diagonalization_impossibility_proof","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Reject unless direct self-reference is cleaner than an ecological reduction.","counterfactual_removal":"No change; the reduction route remains available."},{"slug":"enumeration_and_dovetailing","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"No ecology-specific complete yes-side enumeration is established.","counterfactual_removal":"No change to the bounded pilot."},{"slug":"fallback_mode_router","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Dispatch by enforceable model class and label each result's guarantee.","counterfactual_removal":"Weaker analyses could be presented as universal exact verdicts."},{"slug":"halting_problem_reduction","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Attempt a computable encoding into eventual ecological outcome; make no impossibility claim until checked.","counterfactual_removal":"There is no decisive route for class-wide impossibility."},{"slug":"language_fragment_restriction","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Define a mechanically enforceable finite ecological modeling fragment.","counterfactual_removal":"The exact guarantee lacks an enforceable domain."},{"slug":"many_one_reduction_proof","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Supply totality, computability, and answer-preservation obligations for the reduction.","counterfactual_removal":"A halting analogy could masquerade as a valid transfer."},{"slug":"promise_problem_restriction","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Prefer syntactically enforced fragments; unchecked ecological promises permit authoritative wrong answers.","counterfactual_removal":"No change; fragment membership supplies the boundary."},{"slug":"proof_by_counterexample","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"A counterexample can refute one analyzer but cannot establish the class boundary.","counterfactual_removal":"No material change to classification."},{"slug":"proof_checking","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Independently check solver and reduction claims, including formalization assumptions.","counterfactual_removal":"A flawed boundary could authorize misleading forecasts."},{"slug":"reduction_direction_checklist","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Its useful checks are incorporated into independent proof review.","counterfactual_removal":"No change because the same obligations remain gated."},{"slug":"semi_decision_with_explicit_unknown","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Bound sound witness search and return UNKNOWN, never biological NO, on exhaustion.","counterfactual_removal":"Timeouts may be converted into false negative conclusions."},{"slug":"theorem_prover_guided_search","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"No formal-prover infrastructure is assumed for the bounded first test.","counterfactual_removal":"Manual independent checking remains possible."},{"slug":"turing_reduction_analysis","disposition":"incompatible","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Relative oracle degrees do not supply the desired one-map preservation certificate.","counterfactual_removal":"No loss for the proposed boundary decision."}],"causal_chain":["Formalize the ecological outcome, model language, computation model, and universal quantifiers.","Seek both a total constructive solver and a checked impossibility reduction for the unrestricted class.","Carve out mechanically recognizable fragments where exact termination can be proved.","Route each model to the strongest justified mode and preserve UNKNOWN and out-of-scope states.","Version the guarantee and reclassify when assumptions change."],"baseline":"Run simulations or heuristic forecasts until a time budget expires, then interpret observed survival, extinction, or nonconvergence as the long-run answer.","nearest_rival":"Treat the task solely as statistical uncertainty or computational scaling, adding simulations and hardware without first testing whether the universal exact guarantee is available.","authority_safety":{"affected_parties":["ecological researchers","conservation agencies","land-dependent communities","operators of affected ecosystems","species represented by management mandates"],"decision_authority":"The accountable conservation program owner may authorize analysis; formal claims require independent proof approval, while real interventions remain with existing ecological authorities and affected-party processes.","authorized_first_step":"On synthetic finite-state ecosystem models only, compare exhaustive ground truth with the restricted solver, sound abstraction, and explicit-UNKNOWN routing.","excluded_actions":["No field intervention or species-management change based solely on the pilot.","No undecidability claim without a checked property-preserving reduction.","No exact label for out-of-fragment, timeout, or UNKNOWN cases.","No claim that formal model truth establishes real-ecosystem truth."],"halt_rollback":"Halt if the fragment checker admits excluded models, a purported safe verdict conflicts with exhaustive ground truth, or proof review finds an open obligation; withdraw affected guarantees and revert outputs to UNRESOLVED."}},"negative_tests":{"strongest_counterevidence":"Many practical ecology questions use fixed finite horizons, finite data, or already specified numerical models; their difficulty may be uncertainty, identifiability, or cost rather than computability.","analogy_break":"An ecosystem is not literally a program. Measurement error, stochastic openness, and model misspecification may defeat semantic fidelity before any formal computability result becomes decision-relevant.","failure_condition":"No scientifically useful outcome predicate and enforceable model class can be formalized without excluding the cases stakeholders actually need.","problem_falsifier":"The actual requirement concerns only a fixed finite, effectively enumerable class with a known total procedure, or never claims universal correctness and termination.","intervention_falsifier":"The restricted solver fails within-bound ground truth, the abstraction produces an unsound clearance, the reduction cannot preserve the ecological predicate, or explicit UNKNOWN does not prevent downstream false certainty.","risks":["A correct theorem about a model may be overgeneralized to nature.","A narrow decidable fragment may exclude ecologically important interactions.","Coarse abstraction may create unusable false alarms.","UNKNOWN may be suppressed by downstream decision interfaces.","Formal authority may displace affected communities' legitimate decision rights."]},"null_rationale":null,"classification":{"candidate_kind":"DOMAIN_TRANSFER","prior_art_status":"UNSEARCHED","evidence_maturity":"HYPOTHESIS"},"revision_change_log":{"revision_kind":"ORIGINAL","prior_problem_id":null,"prior_causal_lever_id":null,"problem_changed":false,"causal_lever_changed":false,"conceptual_changes":[],"operational_changes":[],"repairs_addressed":[]},"confidence":0.82,"generator_notes":"Closed-book structural transfer. The ecological existence and practical prevalence of the universal requirement, and any undecidability result, remain hypotheses pending formalization and proof."}