{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__rhetoric","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"ad8f76d5f6a31057e76e65e9b0e65ef1ad0a13d39b6720fe3f5e56bfce63ca4c","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The executable-campaign moderation problem is coherent in the rhetoric domain independently of the source archetype and identifies actors, observable failure, consequence, and objective."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The unrestricted class, universal terminating verdict, conditional impossibility boundary, enforceable decidable fragment, and weaker labeled fallback preserve the source structure."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Under the explicitly stated expressiveness condition, a checked halting-to-reachability reduction can defeat the universal requirement, while enforced restriction and routing directly change which guarantees are issued."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"All source components receive identifiable domain realizations, and selected mechanisms retain distinct proof, restriction, checking, routing, review, and abstention roles without laundering a fallback into an exact verdict."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The candidate labels the central applicability claims as hypotheses or inferences, declares prior art unsearched, makes the impossibility conclusion conditional, and separates formal-model reachability from real audience effects."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether the admitted class is already bounded, while the intervention falsifier separately tests checker termination, correctness, and router labeling."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The first step is offline and synthetic, deployment authority is bounded, affected parties are named, prohibited actions are explicit, and concrete halt and rollback conditions protect against false clearance."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal closely preserves the archetype's quantifiers, model-relative boundary, proof obligations, restricted region, honest fallback, and reclassification triggers."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":3,"reason":"Executable dialogue campaigns and prohibited rhetorical states form a plausible digital-rhetoric substrate, while the candidate correctly limits conclusions about contextual human persuasion."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The proof-restrict-route-label chain is coherent, but its applicability depends on verifying script expressiveness and discharging the reduction and checker proofs."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every listed component is translated into a concrete campaign-language, proof, policy, routing, review, or traceability function."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate anticipates the strongest anti-signature, the formal-to-human analogy break, abstraction unsoundness, unenforceable membership, unusable abstention rates, and guarantee drift."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"It replaces an unreliable harmful-rhetoric Boolean classifier framing with a governed choice among exact model checking, witnessed findings, bounded analysis, and explicit uncertainty."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The synthetic pilot, seeded traces, bounded exhaustion, membership enforcement, label checks, and rollback criteria are executable, though production usefulness remains contingent on coverage and abstention rates."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Early rejection of an impossible guarantee and prevention of false clearance offer substantial value, with material residual risks from formal-model overreach, false alarms, and displacement."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no novelty claim is evidentially supported."}},"weighted_total":83.75,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"The unrestricted-language applicability premise and preservation mapping remain proposed obligations rather than supplied certificates.","repair":"Before any deployment claim, verify the admitted language's computational expressiveness and independently check a total, computable, answer-preserving source-to-target construction.","evidence_boundary":"The present record supports a conditional research design, not an established undecidability verdict for a deployed platform."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Novelty is not established.","repair":"Conduct prior-art review across formal verification of dialogue systems, executable campaign languages, and abstaining moderation architectures before making originality claims.","evidence_boundary":"The supplied packet explicitly marks prior art as unsearched."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior problem identifier, causal-lever identifier, or registered repair against which improvement can be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is a structurally faithful, domain-bounded, falsifiable transfer with an unusually complete mechanism composition and strong authority controls. Its central impossibility result remains explicitly conditional, and novelty remains unsupported, but neither limitation is disguised as established evidence."}