{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__organizational_management","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"bbc10bb621b3c82032748faffe4067d1d329603c3cf4c9f3dab7894d952d0e5b","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem is independently specified as a coarse internal authority rule blocking routine work, with observable organizational symptoms and a rival explanation that does not depend on the source analogy."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The approval gate maps cleanly to a value-blocking wedge, foregone organizational value, a legitimate protected purpose, a targeted redesign, and bounded monitoring."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposed lever directly changes the hypothesized authority bottleneck through risk classification and delegated approval while preserving exception review; baseline comparison and attribution tests can distinguish it from workflow friction or reviewer scarcity."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"All archetype components receive domain realizations, adapted components are explicitly justified, load-bearing mechanisms have removal counterfactuals, and rejected mechanisms are excluded for structurally relevant reasons."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical and novelty claims are not presented as established facts. Hypotheses, inferences, uncertainty, rival causes, and the unsearched prior-art boundary are disclosed without invented support."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether the uniform gate causes blocked work, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether delegation improves outcomes without unacceptable harm."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The first action is bounded, reversible, authority-dependent, logged, audited, and subject to explicit exclusions and immediate rollback for protected-outcome or mandate failures."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate preserves the archetype's central distinction between avoidable distortion and legitimate protection and targets the specific wedge rather than constraints generally."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"Authority, delegation, segregation of duties, control ownership, managerial attention, auditability, and organizational incidence are translated in domain-native terms."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The causal chain is coherent and discriminates the authority rule from adjacent causes, but the attribution and separability assumptions remain empirical hypotheses."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The component set is complete, internally consistent, and operationally translated, including incidence, sensitivity, behavioral response, authority, monitoring, and rollback."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate confronts the strongest rival causes, non-consenting-party obligations, classification failure, gaming, burden shifting, rebound, and rare-harm detection."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"It productively reframes routine approval delay as a potentially avoidable allocation wedge while retaining the important boundary with ordinary transaction costs and genuine control needs."},"practicality_testability":{"score":4,"reason":"The bounded pilot, baseline, eligibility rules, logs, audit sampling, outcome measures, expiry, and rollback conditions support a feasible discriminating test."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Reversibility and control safeguards constrain downside, though rare harms, risk misclassification, and shifted managerial burden could remain difficult to detect within a short pilot."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no evidence supports a novelty claim."}},"weighted_total":87.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The authority-gate attribution remains unvalidated against substantive review time, request quality, reviewer capacity, and genuine resource scarcity.","repair":"Use queue-stage timestamps and matched case analysis to estimate the delay and abandonment attributable specifically to the uniform authority requirement before interpreting pilot effects.","evidence_boundary":"The packet supplies a falsifiable diagnosis and test design but no observed queue decomposition or pilot results."},{"priority":"LOW","issue":"No novelty evidence is available.","repair":"Conduct a bounded prior-art review of risk-tiered delegated approvals, internal control pilots, and approval-threshold redesign before making any novelty claim.","evidence_boundary":"The candidate explicitly records prior art as unsearched."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is the original attempt; neither the problem identifier nor the causal-lever identifier changed, and no prior repairs were supplied."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is a strong, domain-faithful translation of deadweight-loss reduction into internal approval governance. It preserves protected controls, isolates a specific causal lever, supplies distinct falsifiers, and proposes a reversible authority-bounded test. Empirical effectiveness and novelty remain unestablished but are honestly bounded rather than fabricated."}