{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__political_science","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"archetype_slug":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management","domain_slug":"political_science","decision":"CANDIDATE","problem_id":"post_crisis_emergency_rule_accretion","causal_lever_id":"governed_expiration_of_emergency_rules","proposal":{"problem":"Emergency directives, delegations, and implementing guidance can remain formally active or practically influential after their triggering crisis has changed, while supersession and dependency status remain unclear (HYPOTHESIS). This institutional layering can enable selective enforcement, obscure responsibility, burden affected parties, and make repeal risky because later programs may depend on old authority.","actors_substrate":["legislature and oversight committees","executive issuing authorities","implementing agencies","courts and auditors","public archivists","regulated and rights-bearing people","organizations relying on emergency programs"],"observable_state":"A jurisdiction has identifiable emergency-rule layers whose issue dates, current authority, renewal history, supersession, dependencies, and operative status cannot be reliably determined from one accountable register.","consequence":"Obsolete measures may retain practical authority, while indiscriminate repeal may disrupt dependent benefits, obligations, investigations, or judicial review.","affected_objective":"Bound emergency governance while preserving legal continuity, public accountability, reliance interests, and reconstructable history.","structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"sequential deposits","domain_realization":"Successive emergency declarations, orders, delegations, amendments, waivers, and guidance form a temporal institutional stack.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"stale active layers","domain_realization":"Measures whose factual predicate or policy purpose has lapsed may remain enforceable, cited, or behavior-shaping (HYPOTHESIS).","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"},{"archetype_element":"retention versus removal tension","domain_realization":"Termination can reduce exceptional authority but can also disturb reliance, dependent programs, litigation, and accountability records.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"lifecycle governance","domain_realization":"An authorized register assigns each measure an active, review-due, suspended, superseded, repealed, or archived state.","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"},{"archetype_element":"exception and dependency gates","domain_realization":"Judicial proceedings, statutory duties, reliance interests, and dependent actions block or condition disposition.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"preserved deletion evidence","domain_realization":"Authenticated texts, reasons, votes, dependency findings, and successor links remain public after legal effect ends.","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"}],"component_map":[{"component":"layer_inventory_and_identity_map","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Canonical register of every emergency measure and amendment."},{"component":"deposition_order_and_age_index","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Issue, amendment, renewal, and last-substantive-review dates."},{"component":"retention_policy_matrix","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Measure class mapped to review, renewal, archival, and record-preservation rules."},{"component":"decay_function_or_aging_rule","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Age lowers review priority only when crisis predicates and current use also decline; it never by itself voids law."},{"component":"expiration_trigger_definition","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Specified date, crisis indicator, statutory condition, or missed renewal vote."},{"component":"layer_value_and_risk_score","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Transparent triage of necessity, rights burden, reliance, coordination value, and repeal risk."},{"component":"dependency_and_reconstruction_check","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Trace programs, adjudications, rights, duties, and audit paths relying on the measure."},{"component":"pruning_or_archival_pathway","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Authorized renewal, amendment, suspension, repeal, supersession, consolidation, or archival."},{"component":"preservation_exception_register","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Named evidentiary, historical, reliance, safety, and litigation exceptions with owners and end dates."},{"component":"deletion_audit_and_rollback_window","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Delayed-effective suspension or repeal where lawful, with an authenticated decision record and bounded reinstatement procedure."},{"component":"resource_budget_and_storage_tier","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Review-docket capacity plus active-reference and archival-access budgets."},{"component":"review_cadence_and_revalidation_loop","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Periodic committee or issuing-authority review of triggers, exceptions, and dependencies."},{"component":"legal_hold_or_compliance_override","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Court order, investigation, records duty, or superior law blocks destruction and may constrain status changes."},{"component":"hot_warm_cold_access_state","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Frequently used active texts, review-due materials, and authenticated historical archives receive different visibility without conflating access with validity."},{"component":"orphan_layer_detection","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Identify measures with no current legal, programmatic, adjudicative, or reliance dependency."},{"component":"supersession_marker","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Old citations resolve to a status notice and authoritative successor."},{"component":"layer_compaction_candidate_flag","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Flag redundant orders for authorized consolidation while retaining originals."},{"component":"rehydration_or_restore_procedure","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Retrieve authenticated text, metadata, referenced evidence, and dependency history."},{"component":"deletion_impact_estimate","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Estimate affected people, programs, rights, obligations, and reversal difficulty before disposition."},{"component":"stale_context_detector","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Flag mismatch between a measure's stated crisis predicate and current authorized findings."}],"mechanism_dispositions":[{"slug":"age_weighted_value_score","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"TEST_DESIGN","adaptation_or_rejection":"Use a published, contestable triage score; age cannot overcome a legal or dependency veto.","counterfactual_removal":"Review remains possible but candidate selection becomes less consistent and harder to audit."},{"slug":"archive_restore_test","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Periodically reconstruct sampled repealed measures and their decision records.","counterfactual_removal":"Archival preservation could become nominal and failed retrieval would remain undiscovered."},{"slug":"cache_eviction_rule","disposition":"incompatible","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Capacity-driven eviction based on popularity is not legitimate authority for changing a rule's legal effect.","counterfactual_removal":"No causal loss; docket budgeting remains without automatic eviction."},{"slug":"dependency_safe_delete_check","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Treat any unresolved legal, programmatic, adjudicative, or reliance dependency as a disposition block requiring human review.","counterfactual_removal":"Termination could silently break rights, programs, or accountability, hard-gating viability."},{"slug":"lifecycle_storage_tiering_policy","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Tier visibility and archival access, not legal validity; preserve authenticated originals.","counterfactual_removal":"Lifecycle decisions still work, but active search remains cluttered and archives costlier to maintain."},{"slug":"log_rotation_and_cleanup_job","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Blind generational disposal cannot respect political salience, superior law, reliance, or irregular crises.","counterfactual_removal":"No loss because disposition is class-, status-, and dependency-specific."},{"slug":"retention_schedule","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Map measure classes to mandatory review, maximum unreviewed duration, archival duties, and lawful overrides.","counterfactual_removal":"Rules remain active by default and exceptions again become ad hoc."},{"slug":"soft_delete_quarantine_window","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Where law permits, use notice plus delayed-effective suspension or repeal; never erase the historical text.","counterfactual_removal":"Mistaken dispositions become harder to reverse and affected parties receive less transition time."},{"slug":"stale_layer_detection_dashboard","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Publish an owned register showing predicate mismatch, operative status, dependencies, and review deadlines.","counterfactual_removal":"The accumulated stack and its stale candidates remain illegible, preventing systematic action."},{"slug":"time_to_live_ttl_policy","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Prospective measures receive lawful sunset or mandatory-renewal dates; existing measures receive review triggers unless authority permits automatic expiry.","counterfactual_removal":"New emergency measures again acquire indefinite default duration."},{"slug":"tombstone_or_deletion_marker","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Keep a durable status and successor notice at every repealed or superseded identifier.","counterfactual_removal":"Absence becomes ambiguous and obsolete copies may continue to be treated as authoritative."}],"causal_chain":["Inventory and identity resolution make accumulated emergency measures and their authority visible.","Triggers and staleness signals move measures from passive persistence into accountable review.","Dependency, legal-hold, and impact gates separate safe candidates from measures requiring preservation or redesign.","Authorized renewal, consolidation, suspension, repeal, or archival bounds active exceptional authority.","Status markers, decision records, rollback procedures, and restore tests preserve notice and reconstructability."],"baseline":"Ordinary practice is ad hoc renewal or repeal initiated by political attention, with scattered archives and no uniform dependency or supersession check (HYPOTHESIS).","nearest_rival":"A one-time sunset commission or omnibus repeal. It can clear a backlog but lacks prospective triggers, continuing exception revalidation, dependency gates, successor markers, and archival restore tests.","authority_safety":{"affected_parties":["people subject to emergency restrictions","benefit recipients and regulated organizations","implementing officials","litigants and oversight bodies","communities disproportionately burdened by exceptional powers"],"decision_authority":"Only the legislature, court, or issuing authority empowered by governing law may renew, suspend, amend, or repeal a measure; archivists control records preservation, not legal effect.","authorized_first_step":"Run a read-only shadow pilot on at most 50 measures from one completed emergency episode: build the register, independently code status and dependencies, and submit nonbinding recommendations. Change no legal rights or operative status.","excluded_actions":["automatic repeal based only on age or score","destruction of authenticated legal or historical records","status changes by analysts lacking legal authority","concealed exceptions or unrecorded overrides","retroactive impairment of vested rights without lawful process"],"halt_rollback":"Halt if reviewers cannot establish authority, disagree materially on dependencies, identify an affected right or program without a transition plan, or receive a court or records hold. Preserve the prior operative state; during any lawful delayed-effect window, use the recorded reinstatement procedure."}},"negative_tests":{"strongest_counterevidence":"A complete audit may show that apparently old measures are already nonoperative, clearly superseded, easily discoverable, and still retained only for legitimate evidentiary purposes; observed selective enforcement or decision confusion may be rare.","analogy_break":"Political rules are contested and sometimes constitutive rather than disposable information objects. Their value and dependencies may be informal, strategic, or rights-based; access frequency and age are poor proxies for legitimacy, and ending a rule is itself an exercise of power.","failure_condition":"The mapping fails where the measures do not form identifiable temporal layers, legal status is already unambiguous, or no authorized institution can differentiate review, suspension, repeal, and archival states.","problem_falsifier":"Reject the diagnosed problem if the shadow audit finds at least 95% of sampled measures have a uniquely identifiable current status, authoritative successor, documented dependency basis, timely review, and no consequential user misclassification.","intervention_falsifier":"Reject the intervention if independent reviewers cannot reach 85% agreement on proposed lifecycle states, the dependency gate misses any known live dependency, or the register does not reduce blinded status-classification errors by at least 25% versus ordinary sources.","risks":["Scores may disguise political judgments as technical precision.","Sunsets may shift leverage toward actors able to obstruct renewal.","Selective exceptions may preserve favored powers indefinitely.","Public dependency maps may expose sensitive operations or people.","Suspension or repeal may disrupt relied-upon benefits or protections.","Archival tiering may reduce practical public access despite formal preservation."]},"null_rationale":null,"classification":{"candidate_kind":"MECHANISM_COMPOSITION","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 candidate treats emergency-rule accretion as the target problem and preserves political and legal authority boundaries; empirical prevalence and effects remain untested."}