{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__mathematics","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"48b29dab1aea0cff844442486b173afa253f8f93ddb348c2aa5ce95017c69358","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Overstrong theorem hypotheses are a recognizable mathematical problem independent of the deadweight-loss framing, with observable consequences in restricted applicability and duplicated proofs."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The candidate maps the avoidable wedge, blocked value, protected purpose, redesign lever, incidence, and reversible boundary without equating mathematical truth with economic surplus."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Weakening a genuinely unnecessary hypothesis can directly enlarge the sound applicability domain and reduce bespoke proof work, while the proposed proof and application tests distinguish that effect from mere restatement."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Core components are translated coherently, incompatible pricing mechanisms are rejected, and selected mechanisms retain their diagnostic, redesign, assessment, and safeguard functions."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical prevalence, demand, and benefits are explicitly bounded as hypotheses; prior art is marked unsearched, and failed counterexample search is expressly excluded as proof."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem is falsified by hypothesis minimality or absence of valid excluded objects, while the intervention is separately falsified by failure to produce a proved, useful, maintainable generalization."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Proof validity remains non-negotiable, repository authority is bounded, the original theorem is retained, and explicit halt and rollback conditions constrain the pilot."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The correspondence preserves the archetype's central distinction between avoidable exclusion and a legitimate protective constraint."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal respects proof, theorem dependency, counterexample, corollary, formal-library, and maintainer-authority practices specific to mathematics."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The intervention can expand valid applicability, but realized reuse and reduced duplication depend on finding a useful nonessential hypothesis in the selected family."},"component_translation":{"score":3,"reason":"The major components have operational mathematical realizations, although incidence, distribution, surplus, and allocation constructs remain adapted analogues rather than native equivalents."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate identifies necessity proofs, counterexamples, unusable generalizations, complexity transfer, metric gaming, and maintenance burden as defeating evidence."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"The framing unifies hypothesis minimization with protected validity, downstream reuse, and governance of formal-library interfaces."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The bounded audit and staged proof pilot are executable, but the theorem family, usefulness criterion, and complexity budget still require concrete precommitment."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Retention of the original theorem limits downside, while proof effort, interface complexity, and maintenance transfer remain material uncertainties."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no novelty claim is presently supported."}},"weighted_total":82.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"Novelty and prior-art position are unknown.","repair":"Search mathematical generalization practice, hypothesis-minimization methods, and formal-library refactoring precedents before making any novelty claim.","evidence_boundary":"The packet explicitly marks prior art as unsearched, so structural originality cannot establish historical novelty."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The pilot lacks a named theorem family and precommitted usefulness and maintenance criteria.","repair":"Choose a concrete theorem family and define admissible object classes, independent-use evidence, proof-complexity limits, review budget, and interface rollback triggers before execution.","evidence_boundary":"The current packet supplies an operational template but no observed theorem instance or measured downstream demand."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is the original attempt, with no prior problem or causal-lever identifier and no claimed revision improvement."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is a strong, falsifiable structural transfer that preserves mathematical validity while treating unnecessary hypotheses as an avoidable applicability barrier. Its remaining uncertainty concerns empirical usefulness, operational precommitment, and unverified novelty rather than structural fit or safety."}