{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"invariant_mode_decomposition_design__law_governance","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"55a693ffa786f20e684a0c47492e6fb926f62dcf1b8a8b60e6e93e98ea20df3a","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The docket-delay problem is independently specified through observable coupled stage movements, consequences, affected objectives, a baseline, and a domain-grounded falsifier."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposal preserves the archetype's transformation, state, invariant directions, modal response, intervention map, residual checks, drift limits, and interpretation contract without reducing the transfer to surface analogy."},"G3":{"status":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","reason":"The fitted transition and modal sensitivity analysis can support prediction, but observational model perturbations do not by themselves identify the effects of staffing, scheduling, or workflow interventions. Data and an admissible causal design are required."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"All named components receive domain realizations, selected mechanisms have distinct roles, incompatible mechanisms are rejected with reasons, and residual, coupling, conditioning, gap, and local-validity limitations remain visible."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical and causal uncertainty is explicitly labeled as hypothesis or inference, prior-art status is disclosed as unsearched, and no unsupported result is presented as observed fact."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether coupled modes add anything beyond an observable bottleneck, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether mode-directed controls improve outcomes beyond the rival without unacceptable harms."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The authorized action is a deidentified retrospective shadow analysis; merits use, individual prioritization, protected-trait targeting, covert experimentation, unauthorized rights changes, and out-of-regime deployment are excluded with halt and rollback rules."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The transformation-to-mode correspondence is explicit, traceable, and decision-relevant, with residual and regime limits retained."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal respects adjudicative authority, procedural rights, merits independence, heterogeneous cases, fairness auditing, and lawful institutional roles."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":2,"reason":"Coupled docket persistence is plausible, but the proposed observational operator and model sensitivity sweep do not establish that candidate controls cause modal damping or improved timeliness."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every archetype component is translated, and selected, rejected, and incompatible mechanisms are coherently distinguished."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":3,"reason":"The candidate anticipates nonstationarity, non-normality, aggregation harm, residual structure, rival performance, authority laundering, and mode instability, though operator identifiability remains unresolved."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal materially shifts management from visible queues and aggregate averages to persistent cross-stage combinations that may reveal concealed delay dynamics."},"practicality_testability":{"score":1,"reason":"The proposed historical window appears too short for the potentially high-dimensional state definition, and no operator-estimation, regularization, rank, or identifiability procedure is specified."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"A shadow-only initial test has limited direct harm and potentially useful diagnostic value, with strong safeguards against merits and rights effects."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so distinctiveness from existing spectral, state-space, queueing, and court-administration work is unknown."}},"weighted_total":76.25,"disposition":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["causal_plausibility","practicality_testability","novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"The state definition may exceed what the short historical series can identify, making modes, gains, and spectral separation unstable or non-unique.","repair":"Perform a pre-fit data-feasibility study that fixes state dimension, missingness rules, operator estimator, regularization, rank constraints, uncertainty procedure, and reproducibility criteria before decomposition.","evidence_boundary":"Whether a stable operator can be estimated depends on the actual docket data and cannot be resolved closed-book."},{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"Model-based input perturbations are described as intervention leverage even though the fitted observational dynamics do not identify causal control effects.","repair":"Separate predictive sensitivity from causal effect and precommit an admissible identification strategy, such as a justified natural experiment or a lawfully authorized prospective pilot, with rival comparison and rights safeguards.","evidence_boundary":"Causal leverage requires empirical identification or prospective evidence; it cannot be inferred from the modal fit alone."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The transfer's distinctiveness from existing docket-flow, state-space, spectral, queueing, and judicial-administration approaches is unknown.","repair":"Conduct a bounded prior-art review and state which claimed contribution is structurally or operationally distinct from the nearest documented methods.","evidence_boundary":"The packet declares prior art unsearched, so novelty cannot be credited without external research."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior problem, causal-lever, or repair record against which improvement can be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","tester_summary":"The candidate is a strong and safety-conscious structural transfer, but success cannot be confirmed until operator identifiability, causal intervention leverage, and prior-art distinctiveness are established with external evidence."}