{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"invariant_mode_decomposition_design__sport_science","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"5af6d002c5e5b42f99b088cecf097b97169bae804aa93a683a8bbc7610894e2c","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The return-to-sport problem is independently recognizable: acceptable marginal criteria can coexist with reproducible coupled movement behavior and clinically relevant loading or control concerns."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposal explicitly defines a local transition, state vector, invariant directions, modal responses, selection rules, interventions, residuals, drift, coupling, and validity boundaries."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The intervention targets a reproducible outcome-sensitive coordination mode, with modal and safety outcomes that can distinguish leverage from mere descriptive variance."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Load-bearing mechanisms have distinct roles in decomposition, stability classification, sensitivity testing, reconstruction, interpretation, and monitoring; incompatible mechanisms are rejected with coherent counterfactuals."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Claims are labeled as hypotheses or inferences, empirical maturity and prior-art status are disclosed, and the candidate does not present modal association as injury causation."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether the coupled pattern adds information beyond ordinary criteria, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether targeted rehabilitation changes the mode and relevant outcomes."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The authorized step is a consented shadow study, clinical authority remains with treating professionals, prohibited uses are explicit, and athlete-level and model-level halt conditions are specified."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The coupled-state problem and the full modal governance loop closely instantiate the archetype rather than borrowing spectral terminology superficially."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The state variables, movement tasks, clinical actors, local validity conditions, adverse-event stops, and return-to-sport comparison practices are coherently translated into sport-science terms."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The chain from propagating coordination deviations through outcome sensitivity to targeted training is plausible and falsifiable, but actual modifiability and injury relevance remain prospective."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every archetype component receives a concrete domain realization, including frequently omitted residual, coupling, drift, conditioning, and interpretation controls."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate directly addresses nonlinearity, session dependence, artifacts, weak spectral separation, ill-conditioning, structured residuals, rival prediction, and intervention spillovers."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"It materially redirects assessment from isolated threshold compliance toward the persistence and leverage of coupled movement directions while preserving conventional assessment as the decision baseline."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The shadow design, repeated sessions, held-out checks, rival comparison, and suspension rules are executable, though recurrence estimation and controlled intervention evidence require later adequately powered work."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Shadow operation and clinician control limit immediate harm while offering useful diagnostic information, but false reassurance, unnecessary delay, anxiety, and data misuse remain consequential downstream risks."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so distinctiveness relative to existing biomechanical stability and return-to-sport research is not established."}},"weighted_total":87.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["causal_plausibility","practicality_testability","expected_value_risk","novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The shadow study can establish identifiability, repeatability, reconstruction performance, and incremental prognostic signal, but it cannot establish that the mode is a modifiable injury mechanism.","repair":"Preserve the shadow study as the initial stage and require a later controlled intervention study before any clearance use or causal language.","evidence_boundary":"Modal association, predictive increment, intervention responsiveness, and recurrence reduction must remain separate evidentiary claims."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Distinctiveness from existing dynamic-stability, coordination-variability, system-identification, and return-to-sport methods is unknown.","repair":"Conduct a structured prior-art review and specify the closest implemented method, shared elements, and genuinely differentiating contribution.","evidence_boundary":"Conceptual coherence supports research value but does not establish scientific novelty."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior problem or causal-lever identifier and no registered repairs to assess."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate passes every reject-first gate and provides an unusually complete, bounded, and falsifiable modal translation for return-to-sport assessment. It warrants deep research, with causal effectiveness and prior-art distinctiveness remaining explicitly unresolved."}