{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__robotics_automation","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"57d4f5a1eeaa7f2c4c5a2e21614f9452bef9b51c22204c9ac4bbccc1f35de6b9","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The fleet world-model problem is independently specified through actors, artifacts, observable failure states, consequences, and objectives rather than being defined only by analogy."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Mission-derived spatial artifacts are genuine sequential deposits, and the proposal preserves the archetype's retention-versus-removal tension, lifecycle states, exceptions, archival paths, and auditability."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Change-sensitive validation, supersession controls, tiering, dependency gates, and reversible disposition directly target stale operational selection and unbounded active storage."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The complete component set has domain realizations, selected mechanisms retain their defining functions, rejected mechanisms are distinguished coherently, and load-bearing safeguards are connected to the causal chain."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Domain prevalence and effectiveness are bounded as hypotheses, inferential claims are labeled, no external evidence is invented, and prior-art status is explicitly left unsearched."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether harmful accumulation exists, while the intervention falsifier separately compares the lifecycle system against a credible selection-only rival using observable outcomes."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Authority is divided among safety, stewardship, and investigation roles; the first step is read-only; irreversible actions and hold overrides are excluded; and explicit halt conditions preserve recoverability."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal closely instantiates accumulated layers, changing validity, stale authority, differentiated disposition, dependency protection, boundedness, and preserved reconstruction."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"Artifact identity, coordinate frames, localization references, validation, submaps, semantic overlays, robot storage tiers, and incident reconstruction are translated with strong robotics specificity."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The causal chain is credible and directly linked to the diagnosis, but its effectiveness depends on detector accuracy, reference visibility, and restoration fidelity that remain to be demonstrated."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"Every archetype component receives a concrete robotics realization, with sensible adaptations for environmental change, safety evidence, spatial overlap, and task fidelity."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate states strong counterevidence, an analogy break, implementation failure conditions, distinct falsifiers, a credible rival, and several domain-specific risks."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"It reframes map version management as governed lifecycle control, revealing archival recoverability, dependency-safe deletion, holds, tombstones, and bounded active storage that the rival omits."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"A scoped read-only pilot, replay analysis, archive sampling, halt rules, and comparison baseline are practical, though exact validation thresholds and measurement procedures remain undeclared."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The reversible pilot and layered safeguards create favorable learning value with limited initial exposure, while later automation still carries material safety, fidelity, retrieval, and compliance risks."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so originality is unsupported even though the proposed composition is coherent."}},"weighted_total":87.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":["No fabricated citations, studies, performance results, or authority claims were detected."],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"LOW","issue":"The candidate provides no evidence that the lifecycle composition or its robotics application is novel relative to existing map-management, data-governance, and safety-case systems.","repair":"Conduct scoped prior-art and deployment-practice research before making any originality claim, while keeping effectiveness claims separate from novelty findings.","evidence_boundary":"This closed-book evaluation can assess internal structure and domain plausibility but cannot establish prior-art status."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior repair registry, no superseded repair, and no change to either the problem identifier or causal-lever identifier."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate passes every reject-first gate and presents a structurally complete, domain-specific, falsifiable, and safety-bounded lifecycle intervention. Remaining uncertainty concerns empirical performance and unsearched novelty rather than structural viability."}