{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__political_science","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"991301cc75b481e24386a795db48bb3d267330b7b4f635b7d537d1dce536935e","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The candidate identifies a specific institutional problem involving ballot qualification and electoral contestation rather than restating generic inefficiency."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Signature thresholds and error-intolerant approval procedures are mapped coherently as potentially avoidable wedges, while ballot integrity and manageability remain protected purposes."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposed threshold calibration, standardized review, and cure path directly address the hypothesized sources of candidate exclusion, with rival causes explicitly separated for testing."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Relevant components are translated with intact functions, unsuitable pricing mechanisms are rejected, and the selected diagnostic, redesign, safeguard, and pilot mechanisms form a coherent intervention."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical prevalence and effects are consistently bounded as hypotheses or inferences, uncertainty is acknowledged, and no unsupported finding is presented as established evidence."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier distinguishes nonbinding ballot rules from rival explanations, while the intervention falsifier separately tests access gains and unacceptable integrity, workload, usability, legal, and distributional effects."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The authorized starting action is nonbinding, statutory changes are reserved to lawful rulemakers, equal application is required, and live implementation has explicit halt and reversion conditions."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal preserves the archetype's full wedge, protected-purpose, incidence, redesign, monitoring, and rollback structure."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The translation treats electoral competition, equal political standing, legitimacy, constitutional constraints, administration, and partisan manipulation as domain-defining concerns."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The causal chain is coherent and testable, but whether qualification burdens materially suppress credible candidacies remains empirically unresolved."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"All relevant components receive functionally specific political-science realizations, and the incompatible price component is appropriately excluded."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate confronts rival explanations, the limits of exchange language, manipulation risks, observational blind spots, and distinct failure conditions."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"The framework productively separates avoidable procedural exclusion from legitimate integrity protection and improves on indiscriminate threshold reduction."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The shadow audit and bounded lawful pilot are operationally specified, though pre-filing deterrence and candidate credibility remain difficult to observe."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Nonbinding analysis offers useful evidence at low immediate risk, while any live change remains appropriately constrained because electoral harms can affect rights and legitimacy."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"The packet explicitly leaves prior art unsearched and provides no comparative evidence that the composition is novel."}},"weighted_total":85,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"The central empirical claim that ballot-access burdens bind credible entry remains unverified.","repair":"Execute the specified retrospective shadow audit and supplement administrative records with a method for detecting deterrence before filing and distinguishing credible entrants from nuisance candidacies.","evidence_boundary":"The packet provides hypotheses, falsifiers, and a test design but no observed administrative or behavioral results."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Novelty and overlap with established ballot-access reforms are unknown.","repair":"Conduct a documented prior-art review covering notice-and-cure procedures, signature-threshold reforms, shadow processing, uniform pilot designs, and election-law safeguards before claiming innovation.","evidence_boundary":"The classification explicitly marks prior art as unsearched."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original trajectory record with unchanged problem and causal-lever identifiers and no prior repairs to assess."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate clears the reject-first gates as a structurally faithful, domain-sensitive, falsifiable, and authority-bounded research proposal. Its principal remaining needs are empirical validation and prior-art assessment rather than conceptual redesign."}