{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__public_administration_policy","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"fd27a8ab3aa014a18e4b09762b8489f368150f15f4414182b5e8989053093830","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The candidate identifies a concrete administrative implementation problem with observable states, affected parties, consequences, and a domain-specific falsifier independent of the source archetype."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Successive administrative instruments correspond directly to accumulated layers, while status governance, archival pathways, exceptions, dependency checks, and durable markers preserve the source structure."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposed registry, review triggers, lawful status decisions, dependency gates, and redirects plausibly reduce obsolete-instrument visibility and use relative to decentralized manual cleanup."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Every source component receives a coherent domain realization, load-bearing mechanisms have explicit causal or safety roles, and capacity-driven or blind-expiry mechanisms are appropriately rejected."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical prevalence, effects, and prior-art novelty are explicitly bounded as unverified; structural claims are labeled as inference or hypothesis, and no external evidence is fabricated."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether meaningful obsolete-instrument accumulation exists, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether accurate lifecycle governance improves identification and use of controlling guidance."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Legal authority is separated from repository metadata, destruction requires relevant approvals, automatic age-based revocation is excluded, and the bounded first step is reversible and non-destructive."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The accumulated-layer problem, lifecycle states, retention tension, exception handling, dependency protection, reversible disposition, and surviving audit record are preserved with little structural loss."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The translation respects the normative force of administrative instruments, public reliance, records obligations, delegated authority, due process, archival responsibility, and divided public-sector decision rights."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The chain from inventory through lawful disposition and redirects is credible and contrasted with a relevant baseline, but its effect depends on accurate authority resolution, adoption, and repository integration that remain untested."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The component map is complete, specific, and function-preserving, including careful adaptations where storage concepts become review capacity, authority visibility, consolidation, or reliance-sensitive risk."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate states a strong rival diagnosis, a consequential analogy break, distinct falsifiers, mechanism counterfactuals, operational failure conditions, and multiple domain-specific harms."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"Treating policy sprawl as a governed lifecycle converts episodic consolidation into continuing control over authority, visibility, preservation, supersession, and lawful retirement."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"A bounded non-destructive pilot, observable user outcome, halt conditions, rollback path, and comparison baseline are supplied, though measurement procedures and decision thresholds need further specification."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The intervention could materially reduce conflicting implementation while strong authority and preservation safeguards bound harm, but benefits and residual failure rates have not been empirically estimated."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no evidence establishes novelty relative to existing records schedules, policy registries, content-governance systems, or administrative consolidation practices."}},"weighted_total":87.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Novelty relative to established government records management and policy-governance practice is unknown.","repair":"Compare the integrated lifecycle design against existing records schedules, policy registries, supersession practices, archival controls, and continuous policy-review programs before making a novelty claim.","evidence_boundary":"The packet supports structural coherence only; it supplies no searched prior art or comparative implementation evidence."},{"priority":"LOW","issue":"The pilot names desired outcomes but does not fully operationalize measurement reliability or success thresholds.","repair":"Predefine how controlling-guidance identification, stale-instrument use, false retirement, missed dependencies, restoration success, and reviewer agreement will be measured against the baseline.","evidence_boundary":"The proposed pilot is testable in principle, but the packet contains no validated instruments, thresholds, or effect estimates."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with unchanged problem and causal-lever identifiers and no prior repair record against which improvement can be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is a structurally faithful, domain-sensitive, falsifiable, and authority-bounded transfer. It is ready for deeper empirical and prior-art research, with novelty and measured effectiveness deliberately left unresolved rather than guessed."}