{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__public_administration_policy","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"8136eb623141a4bb5f24bad3c3168938cfb7f74de109c367b3a62fa7817eaa8d","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The agency assurance problem is independently specified through an observable administrative practice, affected objectives, actors, and consequences rather than relying solely on analogy to computability theory."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The unrestricted policy-program class, total decider, computation model, decidable fragment, explicit fallback, and boundary drift correspond directly to the archetype while preserving the distinction between class-wide and case-level claims."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Mechanically enforcing the language boundary, requiring constructive or impossibility certificates, and preserving UNKNOWN directly interrupts unsupported universal assurance and mislabeled analyzer outputs."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The component map is complete, selected mechanisms retain their stated roles, rejected mechanisms have coherent reasons, and the composition separates proof, classification, routing, review, and complexity assessment."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The candidate does not assert that the deployed language is undecidable; it conditions any impossibility conclusion on a valid embedding, labels the evidence maturity as hypothetical, and states decisive counterevidence."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether a computability-boundary problem exists, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether the boundary-and-router design improves labeling and disposition in the pilot."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Pilot authority is bounded, affected parties and approving roles are named, consequential production actions are excluded, and explicit halt and rollback conditions protect against semantic mismatch and unsafe automation."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal faithfully instantiates the full boundary-mapping structure, including formal scope, model-relative classification, proof obligations, enforceable decidable regions, honest fallback states, and reclassification triggers."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The translation addresses executable policy, entitlement and regulatory consequences, administrative review, appeals, legal-semantic ownership, service deadlines, and disparate burdens without treating formal validity as legal validity."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":4,"reason":"The causal chain links formal specification and checked evidence to enforceable routing and output labels, with explicit controls against converting inconclusive computation into an administrative verdict."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every archetype component receives a concrete administrative realization, and the mechanism dispositions explain load-bearing, supporting, rejected, and safety roles without conflating them."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate confronts finite-domain counterevidence, semantic mismatch, unenforceable membership, vulnerable-group exclusion, reviewer overload, misuse of UNKNOWN, and complexity limits with appropriate boundaries and safeguards."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"It replaces an undifferentiated analyzer-building effort with a governed classification of what can be decided, under which model and scope, and what weaker service can honestly be offered."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The offline pilot, bounded corpus, enforced fragment, expert adjudication, comparison modes, falsifiers, and rollback are actionable, but outcome measures and acceptance thresholds remain underspecified."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The design can prevent false clearance and false rejection while avoiding live deployment during validation, though exclusion from the fragment, false alarms, delay, and discretionary misuse of UNKNOWN remain material risks."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so the packet provides no evidence that the composition or its public-administration application is novel."}},"weighted_total":91.25,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The pilot lacks prespecified operational measures and acceptance thresholds for mislabeled outputs, unresolved consequential cases, semantic disagreement, workload, and service delay.","repair":"Before execution, define denominators, adjudication rules, subgroup reporting, comparison procedures, and decision thresholds for continuation, revision, or halt.","evidence_boundary":"This is an operational specification gap; the packet supplies a falsifiable comparison but no threshold values."},{"priority":"LOW","issue":"No novelty claim can presently be supported because relevant prior art has not been searched.","repair":"Conduct a scoped search across public-sector rules engines, policy-as-code assurance, formal verification, and administrative decision-support governance, then distinguish established elements from any novel composition.","evidence_boundary":"The current record explicitly marks prior art as unsearched, so novelty must remain unsupported."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is the original attempt, with no prior problem identifier, causal-lever identifier, or supplied repair history against which improvement could be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate passes every reject-first gate and qualifies as a successful, high-value translation. Its strongest features are conditional evidence discipline, enforceable scope, explicit uncertainty states, independent review, and bounded administrative authority; the principal remaining research gap is novelty evidence, with a secondary need for prespecified pilot thresholds."}