{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__innovation_entrepreneurship","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"archetype_slug":"computability_boundary_mapping","domain_slug":"innovation_entrepreneurship","decision":"CANDIDATE","problem_id":"universal_venture_simulation_outcome_decision","causal_lever_id":"scoped_solvability_and_honest_fallback_routing","proposal":{"problem":"A venture-screening startup promises to decide, correctly and with guaranteed termination, whether every arbitrary executable venture simulation will eventually reach a specified milestone such as profitability. Because customer models may contain unrestricted programs and unbounded horizons, timeouts are liable to be reported as negative forecasts even when the declared universal decision problem is not decidable.","actors_substrate":["venture-screening platform team","founders submitting executable models","accelerators and investors","people affected by funding decisions"],"observable_state":"The product accepts open-ended executable models, promises a Boolean outcome for all submissions, and converts timeouts or exhausted searches into rejection without a proved scope-wide termination guarantee.","consequence":"Potentially impossible product commitments consume development capital, while false negative-looking outputs can distort venture selection.","affected_objective":"Provide useful, auditable venture-model screening without overstating what automation can decide.","structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"unrestricted universal analyzer","domain_realization":"A screening product decides eventual milestone reachability for every customer-supplied executable venture model.","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"},{"archetype_element":"implicit class, encoding, and computation model","domain_realization":"Accepted model languages, environmental inputs, horizon, and external-data capabilities are not contractually fixed.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"decidable-region mapping","domain_realization":"Enforceable finite-state, bounded-horizon, or syntactically restricted simulation classes receive exact guarantees.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"honest weaker fallback","domain_realization":"Other submissions receive witnessed YES, bounded evidence, or UNKNOWN rather than a fabricated NO.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"}],"component_map":[{"component":"Problem-Class Specification","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Executable venture models and milestone-reachability property."},{"component":"Instance Representation Contract","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Versioned model language, data, horizon, and milestone encoding."},{"component":"Computation Model Contract","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Declared machine, resources, and external-data calls."},{"component":"Solvability Guarantee Profile","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Exact, one-sided, bounded, or unknown per class."},{"component":"Quantifier and Scope Map","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Separate every-model claims from individual screenings."},{"component":"Computability Status Lattice","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Classify exact, recognizable, partial, relative, or unresolved."},{"component":"Constructive Procedure Witness","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Total decider and proof for each exact fragment."},{"component":"Reduction Preservation Contract","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Check program-to-venture-model embedding and milestone preservation."},{"component":"Computability Impossibility Certificate","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Checked reduction for unrestricted milestone reachability."},{"component":"Assumption Register","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Record language, horizon, environment, and oracle assumptions."},{"component":"Decidable Subclass Map","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Finite-state, bounded-horizon, and restricted-language regions."},{"component":"One-Sided Recognition Contract","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Witnessed milestone attainment can return YES."},{"component":"Unknown and Nontermination Policy","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Keep UNKNOWN, timeout, failure, and NO distinct."},{"component":"Fallback Solution Contract","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Label bounded and one-sided results with exact guarantees."},{"component":"Computability Guarantee Record","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Version-linked claim, proof, scope, and fallback."},{"component":"Recheck Trigger","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Language, horizon, oracle, or milestone changes."},{"component":"Termination Condition","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Declared bound for every shipped screening mode."},{"component":"Scope Boundary","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Mechanically enforce admitted fragments and bounds."},{"component":"Decision Record","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Record shipped boundary and routing choice."},{"component":"Uncertainty Residue","status":"direct","domain_realization":"List unproved obligations and unresolved classes."},{"component":"Independent Proof Review","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Independent check of formalization and reduction."},{"component":"Complexity Follow-On Gate","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Assess cost only after decidability is established."}],"mechanism_dispositions":[{"slug":"abstract_interpretation_or_model_checking","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Business-state abstraction may lose semantic fidelity.","counterfactual_removal":"No core change."},{"slug":"bounded_domain_exhaustive_search","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"TEST_DESIGN","adaptation_or_rejection":"Exhaust bounded horizons and finite models.","counterfactual_removal":"Bounded exact pilot disappears."},{"slug":"computability_boundary_decision_record","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Version boundary, guarantee, and triggers.","counterfactual_removal":"Guarantees can drift silently."},{"slug":"computational_complexity_analysis","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Gate practical feasibility after solvability.","counterfactual_removal":"Decidable may be mistaken for usable."},{"slug":"constructive_algorithm_and_correctness_proof","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Certify exact restricted modes.","counterfactual_removal":"Exact-mode claims lack witnesses."},{"slug":"diagonalization_impossibility_proof","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Reduction is more domain-specific.","counterfactual_removal":"No core change."},{"slug":"enumeration_and_dovetailing","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Explicit-UNKNOWN protocol is operationally safer.","counterfactual_removal":"No core change."},{"slug":"fallback_mode_router","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Route exact, bounded, one-sided, or escalated.","counterfactual_removal":"Weaker results can masquerade as exact."},{"slug":"halting_problem_reduction","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Embed program termination as milestone reachability.","counterfactual_removal":"Unrestricted impossibility remains unsupported."},{"slug":"language_fragment_restriction","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Enforce a decidable simulation language.","counterfactual_removal":"No exact scalable safe region."},{"slug":"many_one_reduction_proof","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Discharge totality and answer preservation.","counterfactual_removal":"Hardness transfer may be invalid."},{"slug":"promise_problem_restriction","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Unenforced promises permit authoritative errors.","counterfactual_removal":"No core change."},{"slug":"proof_by_counterexample","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"TEST_DESIGN","adaptation_or_rejection":"Refute the current universal implementation claim.","counterfactual_removal":"Cheap overclaim test is lost."},{"slug":"proof_checking","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Independently verify proof and assumptions.","counterfactual_removal":"A flawed boundary may govern funding."},{"slug":"reduction_direction_checklist","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Gate source-to-target direction.","counterfactual_removal":"Reversed reductions may pass review."},{"slug":"semi_decision_with_explicit_unknown","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Return witnessed YES or bounded UNKNOWN.","counterfactual_removal":"Timeouts revert to deceptive NO."},{"slug":"theorem_prover_guided_search","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Optional proof discovery, not required.","counterfactual_removal":"Manual checked proofs remain viable."},{"slug":"turing_reduction_analysis","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Relative degrees do not improve routing.","counterfactual_removal":"No operational change."}],"causal_chain":["Specify the executable-model class, property, quantifiers, and computational capabilities.","Test unrestricted milestone reachability with a checked halting reduction while seeking constructive deciders for restricted classes.","Enforce decidable fragments and finite bounds at submission.","Route each admitted query to an exact, bounded, or witnessed one-sided procedure.","Expose UNKNOWN and out-of-scope states, preventing timeout from becoming a negative venture forecast.","Recheck the classification whenever the language, horizon, milestone, or external capability changes."],"baseline":"Continue universal Boolean screening, add compute and examples after failures, and treat timeout as failure or predicted non-attainment.","nearest_rival":"Use a fast probabilistic venture-success predictor with calibrated confidence but no computability classification; useful for forecasting, yet it does not resolve whether the platform's universal exact guarantee is coherent.","authority_safety":{"affected_parties":["submitting founders","investors and accelerators","platform staff","employees and customers indirectly affected by allocation"],"decision_authority":"The platform product owner may authorize a shadow pilot; production guarantee changes require risk governance and independent proof approval.","authorized_first_step":"Offline, test a frozen finite-state, bounded-horizon corpus; verify exact outputs and distinct UNKNOWN/out-of-scope labels without influencing funding.","excluded_actions":["automatic funding rejection from UNKNOWN or timeout","claiming real-world venture success is undecidable from a simulator reduction","accepting unrestricted models under restricted guarantees","shipping an unchecked impossibility certificate"],"halt_rollback":"Halt if a supposedly exact mode fails termination or correctness, fragment membership is bypassed, or labels are collapsed; disable automated decisions and restore human review."}},"negative_tests":{"strongest_counterevidence":"The accepted model language may already be finite and mechanically bounded, with a known total algorithm; then the issue is complexity or product communication, not computability.","analogy_break":"Real ventures are not arbitrary programs, and profitability depends on exogenous behavior and measurement choices. A reduction can establish a boundary only for the encoded simulator class, not for real-world venture outcomes.","failure_condition":"The proposal fails if the restriction excludes most decision-relevant models, membership cannot be enforced, formal milestone semantics diverge from users' questions, or reviewers cannot validate the reduction.","problem_falsifier":"No computability problem exists if the actual requirement concerns only a fixed finite portfolio or probabilistic forecasting, or if every admitted instance lies in an enforced class with an established total decider.","intervention_falsifier":"In the bounded shadow test, the intervention is falsified if exact modes produce an error or fail to terminate, out-of-scope inputs reach them, or users/downstream systems interpret UNKNOWN as NO despite the contract.","risks":["A formally correct boundary may address the wrong business question.","Restrictions may remove the scenarios founders need.","UNKNOWN may disproportionately disadvantage complex ventures.","An impossibility label may be used rhetorically to avoid improving ordinary prediction.","Bounded exhaustive search may be computationally impractical."]},"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":0.84,"generator_notes":"Candidate is limited to guarantees about executable venture-simulation models. It does not claim that real-world entrepreneurial success itself is an undecidable property."}