{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__veterinary_medicine","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"archetype_slug":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management","domain_slug":"veterinary_medicine","decision":"CANDIDATE","problem_id":"stale_active_layers_in_longitudinal_veterinary_records","causal_lever_id":"explicit_lifecycle_state_for_veterinary_record_layers","proposal":{"problem":"Longitudinal veterinary records accumulate old diagnoses, medication orders, alerts, behavior flags, care instructions, and results that remain displayed as active after their clinical context changes. Clinicians must distinguish current state from history during time-limited decisions, while indiscriminate deletion would damage continuity, investigation, and recordkeeping.","actors_substrate":["animal patients and owners","veterinarians and veterinary technicians","clinic medical-records and compliance staff","longitudinal veterinary electronic records","clinical entries, alerts, orders, results, and attachments"],"observable_state":"Records contain age-indexed entries with unclear currentness, duplicated or superseded items, inconsistent inactive states, and no uniform path from active display to archive or deletion.","consequence":"Clinicians may spend excess time reconciling history or act on stale information; clinics either retain everything in active view or perform risky ad hoc cleanup.","affected_objective":"Accurate, timely clinical interpretation while preserving continuity, accountability, and required records.","structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"sequential deposits","domain_realization":"Successive visits, orders, diagnoses, results, alerts, and behavioral observations accumulate per animal.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"stale layers masquerading as current","domain_realization":"Unresolved or copied-forward entries can remain in active clinical views after circumstances change.","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"},{"archetype_element":"retention versus removal tension","domain_realization":"Current-state clarity favors demotion, while continuity and evidentiary needs favor preservation.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"},{"archetype_element":"dependency and reconstruction need","domain_realization":"Summaries, treatment rationales, billing, referrals, and investigations may depend on older entries.","claim_kind":"HYPOTHESIS"},{"archetype_element":"managed disposition paths","domain_realization":"Entries can be confirmed current, superseded, inactivated, archived, quarantined, or deleted under authority.","claim_kind":"INFERENCE"}],"component_map":[{"component":"layer_inventory_and_identity_map","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Registry keyed by animal, encounter, entry type, author, provenance, and identifier."},{"component":"deposition_order_and_age_index","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Creation, event, modification, and last-confirmed-current timestamps."},{"component":"retention_policy_matrix","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Clinic-approved rules by clinical entry and attachment class."},{"component":"decay_function_or_aging_rule","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Age lowers review priority only when combined with currentness and use signals."},{"component":"expiration_trigger_definition","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Review or demotion triggers based on elapsed time, supersession, or contextual change."},{"component":"layer_value_and_risk_score","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Ranks stale candidates with clinical harm, provenance, access, and reconstruction factors."},{"component":"dependency_and_reconstruction_check","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Pre-disposition check for summaries, prescriptions, referrals, billing, and audit references."},{"component":"pruning_or_archival_pathway","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Remove from active view, archive, compact, quarantine, or authorized destruction."},{"component":"preservation_exception_register","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Named exceptions for continuing clinical, evidentiary, research-consent, or historical value."},{"component":"deletion_audit_and_rollback_window","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Actor, reason, time, prior state, and recoverable quarantine."},{"component":"resource_budget_and_storage_tier","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Fast active-record tier plus slower archival tiers with retrieval targets."},{"component":"review_cadence_and_revalidation_loop","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Periodic owner review of rules, exceptions, restore performance, and errors."},{"component":"legal_hold_or_compliance_override","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Blocks disposition during complaints, litigation, investigation, or mandated retention."},{"component":"hot_warm_cold_access_state","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Active chart, accessible history, and archive states."},{"component":"orphan_layer_detection","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Finds entries with no live clinical, administrative, or reconstruction dependency."},{"component":"supersession_marker","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Links an inactive entry to its replacement or explicit resolution."},{"component":"layer_compaction_candidate_flag","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Flags redundant attachments or repeated snapshots for lossless packaging."},{"component":"rehydration_or_restore_procedure","status":"direct","domain_realization":"Authorized restoration into a readable historical view with provenance intact."},{"component":"deletion_impact_estimate","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Estimates clinical, owner, regulatory, and reconstruction consequences."},{"component":"stale_context_detector","status":"adapted","domain_realization":"Flags contradictions, supersession, expired orders, missing reconfirmation, and context change."}],"mechanism_dispositions":[{"slug":"age_weighted_value_score","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Use only to rank review candidates; safety and hold flags override the score.","counterfactual_removal":"Review remains possible but becomes less scalable and consistently prioritized."},{"slug":"archive_restore_test","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Sample archived record classes and verify readable, provenance-preserving restoration.","counterfactual_removal":"Archival could silently become irreversible, undermining safe demotion."},{"slug":"cache_eviction_rule","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Access recency alone is not a defensible clinical-record disposition rule.","counterfactual_removal":"No material change; tier migration can occur without cache-style eviction."},{"slug":"dependency_safe_delete_check","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Gate destructive action on known clinical, administrative, and reconstruction references.","counterfactual_removal":"Cleanup could break continuity or accountability, hard-gating viability."},{"slug":"lifecycle_storage_tiering_policy","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"OPERATIONAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Demote inactive history while preserving identity, readability, and retrieval targets.","counterfactual_removal":"Active-view cleanup remains possible, but economical long-term preservation weakens."},{"slug":"log_rotation_and_cleanup_job","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"Clinical value is not reliably determined by position in an append-only generation chain.","counterfactual_removal":"No material change to the proposed lifecycle."},{"slug":"retention_schedule","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Map veterinary record classes to approved minima, maxima, actions, exceptions, and holds.","counterfactual_removal":"Disposition lacks consistent authority and cannot safely proceed."},{"slug":"soft_delete_quarantine_window","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Hide first, log the act, permit restoration, and destroy only after impact-scaled review.","counterfactual_removal":"Early errors become irreversible, making automated disposition unacceptable."},{"slug":"stale_layer_detection_dashboard","disposition":"selected_load_bearing","contribution_type":"CORE_CAUSAL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Create an owned worklist of potentially stale active clinical entries without acting automatically.","counterfactual_removal":"The target condition stays distributed and invisible, breaking the detection-to-review chain."},{"slug":"time_to_live_ttl_policy","disposition":"considered_rejected","contribution_type":"NONE","adaptation_or_rejection":"A blind self-expiring clock is unsafe for clinical content; dates may trigger review, not expiration.","counterfactual_removal":"No loss; class-specific review triggers supply timing without automatic expiry."},{"slug":"tombstone_or_deletion_marker","disposition":"selected_supporting","contribution_type":"SAFETY_GUARDRAIL","adaptation_or_rejection":"Retain identity, disposition reason, date, and successor pointer after removal.","counterfactual_removal":"Absence becomes ambiguous and stale replicas or references may misresolve."}],"causal_chain":["Inventory entries and expose lifecycle state and provenance.","Detect and rank possibly stale active layers.","Authorized clinicians confirm current, superseded, inactive, or exceptional status.","Retention and dependency gates determine permitted disposition.","Demotion, archive, quarantine, or deletion reduces stale active visibility while preserving required history.","Audits, restore drills, and revalidation reveal errors and policy drift."],"baseline":"Permanent encounter history plus inconsistently maintained active lists; clinicians reconcile manually during visits, and cleanup is ad hoc.","nearest_rival":"A periodic clinician-led problem-list and medication reconciliation campaign without record-wide lifecycle states, dependency gates, archival tests, or governed disposition.","authority_safety":{"affected_parties":["animal patients","owners or custodians","treating clinical teams","records and compliance staff","referring clinicians"],"decision_authority":"Clinic medical director and records/compliance officer approve policy; a treating veterinarian confirms clinical currentness; only designated records staff authorize destructive disposition.","authorized_first_step":"Run a silent-mode retrospective test on 200 closed encounters from one clinic: flag candidates without changing records, have two clinicians independently adjudicate a stratified sample, and compare review time, stale-item precision, disagreements, and missed dependencies against ordinary reconciliation.","excluded_actions":["automatic clinical deletion or inactivation","changing treatment, diagnosis, or owner instructions from detector output","overriding retention, investigation, consent, or legal holds","compacting content in a way that loses clinical meaning or provenance","using age or low access as the sole disposition reason"],"halt_rollback":"Halt if a held or clinically current entry is recommended for destructive action, dependencies cannot be resolved, reviewer disagreement exceeds the preset threshold, or restoration fails; retain originals, disable recommendations, and revert any pilot state from the audit log."}},"negative_tests":{"strongest_counterevidence":"A blinded chart audit could show that supposedly stale active entries are rare, reliably recognized as historical, and add negligible review burden or decision error.","analogy_break":"Medical-record entries are evidentiary and semantically interdependent, not disposable cache objects; age, storage pressure, and access frequency cannot establish clinical invalidity.","failure_condition":"Lifecycle labels become another unmaintained layer, archival delays impede care, or clinicians bypass the system because review work exceeds benefit.","problem_falsifier":"Under the ordinary baseline, representative records show few ambiguous active layers and no meaningful association with reconciliation time, disagreement, or incorrect current-state interpretation.","intervention_falsifier":"In the bounded silent test, flags have inadequate adjudicated precision, fail to reduce review time or improve current-state interpretation, or repeatedly miss dependencies and protected records.","risks":["incorrect inactivation could conceal clinically relevant history","scoring may encode workflow or documentation bias","archive retrieval latency may delay care","quarantine may conflict with a mandatory destruction rule","excess alerts may create review fatigue","identity errors may merge different animals or episodes"]},"null_rationale":null,"classification":{"candidate_kind":"MECHANISM_ADAPTATION","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":0.87,"generator_notes":"Closed-book structural transfer; veterinary prevalence, effect size, thresholds, and legal requirements remain unverified."}