{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__music_musicology","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"02b95af1ee19ad2c377a0bd68cb1d0b28109894c0022d5028acc47ab76bfabb3","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The candidate identifies a domain-specific problem involving authority confusion, preservation, and reproducibility in digital critical editions rather than merely restating generic accumulation."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Successive editorial artifacts form identifiable temporal layers, and the proposal maps lifecycle states, exceptions, dependencies, reversible disposition, and reconstruction paths coherently."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Status labels, demotion from active discovery, successor links, and governed disposition directly target obsolete layers appearing authoritative while preservation controls protect provenance."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"All archetype components receive credible domain realizations, and selected mechanisms retain their defining functions with appropriate rejection of content-blind eviction and rotation."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical efficacy and prevalence are explicitly bounded as hypotheses, prior-art status is disclosed as unsearched, and no unsupported result is presented as established evidence."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem audit and intervention comparison can fail independently, with observable authority-confusion outcomes and explicit preservation-harm conditions."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Joint scholarly and repository authority, rights-holder and community-custodian controls, reversible quarantine, exclusions, halt criteria, and restoration procedures adequately bound the pilot."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal preserves the full lifecycle structure: accumulated deposits, changing value, stale authority, differentiated disposition, exceptions, dependency protection, and reconstructability."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"Notation encodings, apparatus links, renders, citations, editorial states, repositories, cultural restrictions, and scholarly provenance are used in ways specific to digital musicology."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The intervention plausibly reduces mistaken reliance by changing discovery status and reference resolution, though its empirical effect remains to be tested."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The component map is complete and substantively translated, with adapted elements constrained to appropriate editorial and preservation roles."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate addresses historical-value reversals, incomplete dependencies, false precision, minority-reading visibility, restoration failure, rights conflicts, and metadata accumulation."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"Lifecycle governance usefully reframes version preservation as an authority-and-disposition problem beyond maintaining an immutable history and latest pointer."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"The bounded inventory-and-quarantine pilot is executable and reversible, but outcome coding and sampling procedures require further operational specification."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"Potential gains in interpretability and maintenance are paired with strong safeguards, although discoverability, rights, and preservation risks remain consequential."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"The packet explicitly reports that prior art is unsearched and supplies no comparative novelty evidence."}},"weighted_total":85,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The proposal lacks evidence that the intervention is novel relative to existing digital-edition repository and scholarly-encoding practices.","repair":"Conduct a targeted prior-art comparison covering edition versioning, archival status metadata, persistent citation resolution, and preservation workflows.","evidence_boundary":"The closed-book packet labels prior-art status as unsearched, so novelty cannot be inferred."},{"priority":"LOW","issue":"The pilot does not fully define how retrieval of a superseded layer as current will be observed and coded.","repair":"Predefine eligible retrieval events, authority-confusion criteria, comparison windows, and preservation-failure checks before the pilot begins.","evidence_boundary":"The candidate supplies falsifiers and a bounded intervention but not a complete measurement protocol."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior repair record, changed identifiers, or claimed improvement to attribute."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is structurally complete, domain-grounded, causally credible, falsifiable, and safely bounded. Its principal unresolved boundary is novelty, with a secondary need for a more explicit pilot measurement protocol."}