{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"negative_space_design__ethnography_qualitative_methods","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"f60a57371b4f1324e51989337abce3560f2c0910dd4aa97f793bc1959ddaba56","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The premature filling of reflective conversational gaps is a recognizable qualitative-research problem independent of the archetype vocabulary."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Moderator additions instantiate crowding, bounded silence supplies protected absence, participant expression is the clarified positive form, and recovery rules frame the absence."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Withholding premature moderator speech plausibly increases unclaimed formulation time and reduces immediate steering, while the proposed measures can test the resulting participant contribution."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Every archetype component has a domain realization, and the load-bearing facilitation-silence mechanism is distinguished from supporting cuts, cues, and rejected visual analogues."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical effects are explicitly bounded as hypotheses or inferences, alternative explanations are acknowledged, and no unsupported novelty or prior-art claim is asserted."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether the diagnosed baseline failure exists, while the intervention falsifier separately tests benefit, relevance, comfort, accessibility, and safety."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Pilot authority is limited by ethics approval and consent; participants retain control; coercive silence and delayed support are excluded; halt and rollback conditions are explicit."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The transfer preserves deliberate omission, protected absence, the positive form it supports, bounded reintroduction, interpretation checks, and recoverability."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal is grounded in interviewing and group-inquiry practice, transcript and recording observables, participant feedback, interpretive context, consent, rapport, and unequal conversational power."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The withholding-to-formulation pathway is coherent and testable, but whether silence reduces steering without increasing anxiety or ambiguity remains an empirical hypothesis."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The component map is complete, specific, mutually coherent, and operational rather than merely metaphorical."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate addresses necessary clarification, rapport, coercion, access differences, technical failure, false verbosity proxies, moderator spillover, and the limits of fixed timing."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"The negative-space frame usefully unifies omission, protection, meaning, pacing, and recovery, though deliberate facilitation silence is already a recognizable practice."},"practicality_testability":{"score":4,"reason":"The bounded within-interview comparison specifies eligible prompts, a usual-practice comparator, observable outcomes, independent coding, acceptability checks, and stopping conditions."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The low-risk reversible pilot could improve participant-led accounts, while bounded waits, recovery cues, exclusions, and rollback materially constrain foreseeable harms."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no novelty evidence is available."}},"weighted_total":87.5,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"The distinctiveness of the composed protocol relative to established interviewing and facilitation practices is unknown.","repair":"Before making any novelty claim, compare the full composition of protected waiting, diagnostic monitoring, neutral recovery, and recoverable deferred probes against relevant prior methods.","evidence_boundary":"The closed-book packet supports structural evaluation but contains no prior-art search."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior problem, causal lever, or repair record against which improvement can be attributed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is a strong, domain-native transfer with complete component translation, a plausible causal pathway, separate falsifiers, and proportionate authority and safety controls. Its effectiveness remains appropriately testable, while novelty remains unestablished."}