{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__chemistry_materials","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"bd9c0a031d2228880f1e67c84a94bd8fd17602d93865cf4d85705256cbb270ae","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The laboratory problem is independently recognizable: aging physical samples create validity, storage, safety, and reproducibility risks even without the archetype framing."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Accumulated sample lots and aliquots correspond closely to temporally deposited layers, with explicit age, lifecycle, exception, dependency, archival, and disposition states."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Validity gating, dependency review, controlled tiering, and reversible disposition plausibly interrupt misleading reuse and unmanaged accumulation; empirical effect magnitude remains a pilot question."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The component map is complete, physical-sample limitations are respected, load-bearing mechanisms are identified, and unsafe content-blind mechanisms are explicitly rejected."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical claims are bounded as hypotheses or inferences, prior-art status is disclosed as unsearched, and the proposal does not equate age with chemical invalidity or custody restoration with material restoration."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether the alleged sample-library harms exist, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether the proposed lifecycle controls improve outcomes without unacceptable costs."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Irreversible disposal has named scientific and safety authority, holds override cleanup, hazardous handling is constrained, and the initial pilot preserves rollback through quarantine and audit records."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal preserves the archetype's accumulated-deposit problem, differentiated aging, active-versus-archived states, dependency checks, exceptions, reversible cleanup, and durable disposition records."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The translation accounts for material-specific degradation, destructive assays, incompatibility, hazardous handling, container failure, and the impossibility of recreating a destroyed unique specimen."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"Removing suspect samples from routine selection and gating destruction should affect the stated harms, but staleness inference and dependency metadata may be incomplete and require validation."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every archetype component receives a concrete laboratory realization, including difficult elements such as compaction, restore testing, legal overrides, supersession markers, and deletion impact."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate supplies strong counterevidence, an explicit analogy break, separate failure conditions, realistic risks, and mechanism-level counterfactual removals."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"The lifecycle framing advances beyond location inventory and fixed discard dates by separating present validity, retention value, dependency, custody tier, quarantine, and provenance-preserving disposal."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The bounded pilot, observable register, classification halt condition, rollback path, and comparative outcomes are executable, though condition assays and class thresholds still need local specification."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Reversible quarantine, limited scope, holds, and shared authority constrain harm, while residual risks remain from physical movement, destructive testing, misclassification, and unstable materials."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"The candidate explicitly reports prior art as unsearched and supplies no evidence that the composition is novel relative to existing laboratory sample-management practice."}},"weighted_total":87.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Originality is unsupported because relevant prior art has not been examined.","repair":"Before asserting novelty, compare the proposed validity-gated retention and reversible-disposition composition with laboratory information systems, biobank or specimen governance, chemical inventory controls, and archival sample-management practice.","evidence_boundary":"This is a research requirement for novelty assessment, not evidence against the proposal's structural or causal fit."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior problem or causal-lever identifier and no registered repair history; neither identifier changed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate passes every reject-first gate and is suitable for deeper research. It is structurally complete, domain-aware, causally testable, and appropriately bounded for hazardous physical materials; originality remains unestablished pending prior-art research."}