{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"negative_space_design__disaster_management","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"977d36569f5619e66db50fe85f905c122ae63a5a0b453ccecd0eb7828df0392f","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The radio-contention problem is independently observable through occupancy, overlap, repetition, acknowledgment, and recognition outcomes; it does not depend on accepting the design analogy."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Routine traffic is mapped to crowding, controlled deferral to omission, protected airtime to bounded absence, and priority-message recognition to the positive form clarified by that absence."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposed protocol directly changes shared-channel occupancy and attention competition, while preserving urgent override and identifying technical preemption as a causal rival."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"All archetype components receive domain realizations, selected mechanisms have differentiated functions, and rejected mechanisms are excluded with counterfactual explanations."},"G5":{"status":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","reason":"The candidate appropriately labels its claims as hypotheses or inferences, but supplies no incident evidence, controlled exercise results, effect estimates, or prior-art search capable of establishing prevalence, benefit, or novelty."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem and intervention have distinct falsifiers, a defined baseline, a nearest rival, measurable outcomes, and adverse-effect criteria."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Authority is assigned to incident-command and communications roles, initial testing is non-live, protected traffic is explicitly exempted, and halt and rollback conditions are stated."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"Protected temporal absence is the active intervention and is explicitly related to the priority signal it is intended to clarify."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":3,"reason":"The proposal recognizes radio-net authority, serial contention, urgent override, accountability traffic, channel failure, interoperability alternatives, and incident-tempo risks, though field prevalence remains unverified."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"Reducing deferrable occupancy could create available airtime and reduce masking, but the benefit relative to technical priority access and the possibility of displaced congestion require evidence."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The translation covers the full component set with concrete protocol realizations, preservation rules, state interpretation, recoverability, and reintroduction conditions."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate identifies analogy limits, rival causes, context-loss risks, power effects, outage ambiguity, congestion migration, and a potentially superior rival intervention."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"Treating silence as protected operational capacity yields a useful reframing beyond generic message prioritization, although similar radio-discipline practices may already exist."},"practicality_testability":{"score":4,"reason":"A controlled scripted exercise can compare protocols using observable communication, comprehension, and safety outcomes with immediate rollback."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"A non-live reversible trial has favorable bounded risk, but operational value and downstream congestion effects are not yet demonstrated."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched and no evidence establishes novelty of the protocol or its composition."}},"weighted_total":83.75,"disposition":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"The diagnosed contribution of routine channel occupancy to urgent-message failure is unsupported by representative observations.","repair":"Analyze incident recordings or controlled traffic traces to attribute delay and recognition loss among occupancy, coverage, interoperability, wording, and operator factors.","evidence_boundary":"Until such evidence exists, the problem prevalence and causal attribution remain hypotheses."},{"priority":"HIGH","issue":"Comparative benefit and safety relative to ordinary net control and technical priority access are unknown.","repair":"Run the authorized controlled comparison with prespecified success, context-retention, outage-interpretation, and halt criteria.","evidence_boundary":"Mechanistic plausibility does not establish operational effectiveness or noninferiority on safety outcomes."},{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Novelty and overlap with established radio-discipline protocols are unknown.","repair":"Conduct a documented prior-art review covering emergency communications doctrine, net-control silence procedures, priority traffic protocols, and technical preemption.","evidence_boundary":"No novelty claim is supportable while prior-art status remains unsearched."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is the original attempt; neither the problem identifier nor the causal-lever identifier changed, and the remaining weakness is evidentiary rather than attributable to a revision."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"RESEARCH_NEEDED","tester_summary":"The candidate is structurally coherent, domain-aware, falsifiable, and safely testable, but empirical effectiveness, causal prevalence, comparative performance, and novelty cannot be established from the closed-book packet."}