{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__psychology","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"7a8422a475ad11e417dae44e2d8363006884fe9c62635f2af654c4e1752bf40c","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The stale-formulation problem is independently recognizable in longitudinal psychological records and is not defined merely by resemblance to the archetype."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposal preserves the temporal stack, stale-authority hazard, retention-versus-removal tension, explicit lifecycle states, exceptions, dependency checks, reversible disposition, and auditability."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Visible status and supersession markers plausibly interrupt copied-forward authority, while governed archival and dependency controls preserve clinically necessary history."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The component map is complete and domain-specific, selected mechanisms retain their operative roles, and unsafe content-blind mechanisms are explicitly rejected rather than cosmetically translated."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical effectiveness and prevalence are bounded as hypotheses, prior-art status is disclosed as unsearched, and no unsupported citations or invented findings are presented."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether stale visibility causes measurable harm, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether lifecycle management improves decisions without hiding relevant history or impairing rights."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Authority is divided among qualified clinical, governance, privacy, and legal actors; the initial test is read-only and reversible, permanent destruction is excluded, and explicit halt conditions protect safety, access, and contestation rights."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate closely instantiates accumulated temporal layers whose active validity changes while preservation, reconstruction, and exception needs remain."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The translation respects the interpretive and contested nature of psychological formulations, distinguishes clinical supersession from record destruction, and preserves patient rights and contextual history."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The proposed pathway from detection through reviewed status assignment to reduced stale authority is coherent, although its decision effects remain empirically unverified."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every archetype component receives a meaningful domain realization, with age treated as a review cue and storage metaphors translated into visibility, access, and governance controls."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate directly addresses hidden historical signal, interpretive recurrence, automation bias, suppression of contested accounts, retrieval failure, privacy exposure, and maintenance burden."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"Treating formulations as governed lifecycle states offers a substantial alternative to both indiscriminate chart cleanup and passive chronological accumulation."},"practicality_testability":{"score":4,"reason":"The bounded pilot specifies eligible cases, reversible actions, comparison outcomes, responsible authorities, exclusions, halt conditions, and rollback."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The reversible visibility-focused pilot has favorable learning value, but privacy exposure, status-label authority, maintenance burden, and accidental hiding of safety history remain material risks."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art and novelty were explicitly left unsearched, so no novelty claim is evidenced in the closed-book packet."}},"weighted_total":90,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior problem or causal-lever identifiers and no earlier repairs against which improvement could be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate passes every reject-first gate, preserves the archetype's lifecycle logic without importing unsafe automatic expiry, and offers a reversible, falsifiable psychology-domain pilot. Empirical effectiveness and novelty still require research, but those bounded uncertainties do not undermine candidate viability."}