{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__chemistry_materials","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"f1efb54b07fad221ac6b93e3e1195a7089c1e57bf75b77afd049ed5f24985114","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposal addresses a domain-native safety failure involving hazard-reachability claims, simulation timeouts, and production-model scope rather than merely restating the abstract archetype."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The open-ended class, universal terminating guarantee, model-relative boundary, decidable regions, explicit unknown behavior, and reclassification triggers correspond coherently to the archetype."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Enforceable scope checks and guarantee-labeled routing directly interrupt the path from inconclusive computation to a false safety verdict, even while the unrestricted-class status remains unresolved."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The component map is complete, and the selected mechanisms have distinct constructive, impossibility-testing, fallback, review, and operational roles with credible removal counterfactuals."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The chemistry-specific impossibility proposition is consistently marked as hypothetical, prior-art status is unsearched, and the proposal requires a checked reduction before asserting undecidability."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The production-class falsifier tests the problem premise, while the shadow-routing comparison separately tests whether the intervention improves guarantee correctness and scope handling."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The initial test is non-operational, authority is jointly assigned with independent review, affected parties are named, prohibited claims and actions are explicit, and rollback returns decisions to human-reviewed safety procedures."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The transfer preserves the archetype's quantifiers, computation-model dependence, evidence obligations, status distinctions, restricted regions, and honest fallback structure."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":3,"reason":"The proposal uses credible reaction-network and process-safety objects, but it correctly leaves unresolved whether the formal encoding and its unbounded features faithfully represent deployed chemistry."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"Scope enforcement, explicit unknown outputs, and labeled routing plausibly prevent timeout from becoming safe, while the stronger computability classification still depends on unresolved formal work."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every named archetype component receives a specific chemistry realization, including proof obligations, assumptions, review, operational boundaries, and complexity follow-on."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate anticipates finite production classes, physical-formal mismatch, unusable fragments, excessive unknowns, label misuse, abstraction unsoundness, and invalid reduction direction."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"It replaces a simulator-performance framing with a sharper separation among unrestricted solvability, bounded exactness, sound approximation, witness confirmation, and operational abstention."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The versioned desk test, independent review, archived-model shadow routing, observable labels, and halt conditions are executable, though reduction construction and useful fragment design may require substantial formalization."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposed first step can expose dangerous labeling and specification errors without altering physical operations, and its rollback and authority boundaries substantially contain downside."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":1,"reason":"The synthesis is potentially distinctive in this domain, but prior art is explicitly unsearched and no comparative novelty evidence is supplied."}},"weighted_total":86.25,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The unrestricted reaction-language hypothesis remains model-relative and lacks a completed chemistry-specific reduction or constructive refutation.","repair":"Execute the proposed formal boundary test while preserving unresolved status until the encoding, preservation argument, and theorem scope pass independent review.","evidence_boundary":"No undecidability conclusion is warranted from the embedded material alone."},{"priority":"LOW","issue":"Distinctiveness relative to existing reaction-network verification and safety-analysis practice is unknown.","repair":"Conduct a targeted prior-art comparison before making novelty claims, without changing the current safety rationale.","evidence_boundary":"The packet explicitly marks prior art as unsearched."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with unchanged problem and causal-lever identifiers and no prior repairs to assess."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is a structurally complete, safety-conscious, and falsifiable transfer. It earns success because its operational intervention does not depend on prematurely proving undecidability, while all unresolved scientific and novelty claims remain explicitly bounded."}