{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__pharmacology_toxicology","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"4a640e9af1c8af91a9f4908cd370d8e516619323aa35800d21bc3943fd8f78a7","gates":{"G1":{"status":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","reason":"The proposed review wedge is independently intelligible, but the packet provides no observed pathway evidence establishing that uniform full review, material avoidable delay, or attributable animal-holding burden actually occurs."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The mapping preserves the wedge, blocked activity, protected purpose, targeted redesign, incidence analysis, monitoring, and reversible implementation structure without treating substantive safety scrutiny as waste."},"G3":{"status":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","reason":"Risk-tiered routing could reduce procedural waiting, but an audit is needed to distinguish routing intensity from necessary scientific consultation, reviewer scarcity, or other binding causes of delay."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The component translations are unusually complete, incompatible mechanisms are rejected for domain-specific reasons, and the selected mechanisms have distinct diagnostic, causal, evaluative, and safety roles."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical propositions are consistently bounded as hypotheses or inferences, uncertainty is explicit, prior art is marked unsearched, and no unsupported scientific result is presented as established fact."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem and intervention have separate observable falsifiers, including absence of attributable avoidable delay and failure of the pilot to improve burden while satisfying protection limits."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Designated institutional authorities retain classification, override, suspension, and approval powers; hazardous or uncertain changes are excluded; and explicit halt and rollback conditions protect animals, staff, and downstream evidence users."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal faithfully instantiates a potentially avoidable procedural wedge while preserving the archetype's protected-purpose, incidence, bounded-pilot, monitoring, and rollback invariants."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":3,"reason":"The proposal is well adapted to toxicology governance, animal welfare, biosafety, scientific validity, and asymmetric harm, although the local amendment process and governing requirements remain unverified."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":2,"reason":"The proposed routing mechanism is plausible and clearly contrasted with capacity expansion, but the binding source and magnitude of delay have not been empirically established."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Nearly the full component set is translated into concrete domain artifacts, boundaries, measurements, safeguards, and decision rules, with the irrelevant price diagnostic explicitly ruled out."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate directly addresses strategic underclassification, rare harms, selection effects, displaced delay, authority limits, workload transfer, and the nonconsenting status of animals."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"It usefully reframes amendment delay as a separable mixture of procedural drag and substantive protection, enabling a narrower intervention than generic deregulation or staffing expansion."},"practicality_testability":{"score":4,"reason":"The audit, bounded pilot, observable measures, comparison condition, eligibility rules, override process, sunset, and rollback triggers form an executable testing sequence."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"A tightly bounded audit and pilot could recover time and reduce holding burden at controlled exposure, but rare irreversible harms and classification error constrain confidence."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so there is no evidence that the proposed risk-tiered amendment pathway is novel within toxicology oversight practice."}},"weighted_total":80,"disposition":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["causal_plausibility","novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"The existence and causal importance of the proposed procedural wedge are unverified.","repair":"Conduct the prospective nonbinding pathway audit before authorizing any expedited lane, stratifying amendments by proposed eligibility and separating substantive consultation time from routing, duplication, waiting, and capacity effects.","evidence_boundary":"The packet supplies a testable hypothesis and measurement plan but no observed amendment-level data."},{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"Protection-equivalent risk tiers have not been validated against actual amendment outcomes.","repair":"Retrospectively apply the proposed screen to completed amendments and assess misclassification, overrides, welfare events, biosafety events, validity consequences, and compliance outcomes before setting pilot eligibility and stopping limits.","evidence_boundary":"The exclusions are scientifically cautious, but their sensitivity and operational reliability are unknown."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Novelty and institutional precedent cannot be judged closed-book.","repair":"Research existing expedited amendment policies, delegated-review practices, governing requirements, and published evaluations, then identify what operational feature or test design is genuinely distinct.","evidence_boundary":"The candidate accurately reports its prior-art status as unsearched."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with unchanged problem and causal-lever identifiers and no prior repairs or revisions against which improvement can be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","tester_summary":"The candidate is structurally strong, safety-conscious, domain-credible, and highly testable. Its unresolved issue is evidentiary rather than architectural: observed pathway data must establish that risk-insensitive review is a material avoidable wedge and that the proposed screen preserves substantive protections. Prior-art research is also required before novelty can be credited."}