{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"negative_space_design__pharmacology_toxicology","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"da37a739b1aac8ca9996d4eefe7fc87262c0e00f55e5329efbf17883a766e65a","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The carryover problem is independently observable through residual analytes, baseline deviation, order effects, and response variability without relying on the archetype framing."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The proposal preserves the defining structure of deliberate omission, a protected absence interval, a bounded relationship to the subsequent exposure, preserved context, and an effect test."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Withholding the next compound until measured recovery criteria are met can reduce temporal overlap between prior and current exposure states, improving attribution, while the candidate explicitly limits what recovery measurements can establish."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"All archetype components receive domain-specific realizations, and selected mechanisms have distinct causal, operational, or safety roles with explicit counterfactual-removal tests."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical efficacy and novelty are not presented as established; the intervention is labeled hypothetical, prior art is marked unsearched, inferential claims are bounded, and important latent-state limitations are disclosed."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether baseline carryover exists, while the intervention falsifier separately tests whether gated recovery improves attribution without unacceptable biological or throughput costs."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Authority is assigned to appropriate study governance, the first step is a bounded pilot, essential support and monitoring remain mandatory, prohibited extrapolations are explicit, and halt and rollback conditions are defined."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"Protected compound absence is the active organizing intervention rather than an aesthetic metaphor, with explicit boundaries, preserved context, reintroduction criteria, and validation."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":4,"reason":"The proposal uses coherent toxicology concepts including sequential carryover, residual analytes, metabolites, adaptive responses, viability, order effects, fixed washout, and reusable model constraints."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The proposed chain from reduced residual state to improved attribution is credible, but measured recovery may not capture latent adaptation or delayed toxicity."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The component map is complete and operationally differentiated, including omission, protection, boundaries, interpretation, recovery, context preservation, and effect testing."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate directly confronts independent-unit designs, nonempty biological recovery, imperfect marker panels, aging, selection bias, delivery failure, and throughput tradeoffs."},"reframing_gain":{"score":3,"reason":"The negative-space framing usefully distinguishes protected recovery from passive waiting and emphasizes deliberate exclusion with context preservation, although it remains close to washout and recovery practice."},"practicality_testability":{"score":3,"reason":"A bounded comparative pilot, measurable outcomes, maximum duration, and rollback are specified, but marker selection and validated release thresholds remain assay-specific implementation work."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The pilot could improve attribution at limited initial scope, while viability, model drift, throughput, and false-reassurance risks are recognized and monitored."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"Prior art is explicitly unsearched, so no evidence establishes that the measurement-gated recovery design is novel within reusable toxicology platforms."}},"weighted_total":85.0,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is the original attempt; neither the problem identifier nor the causal-lever identifier changed, and no prior repair is claimed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"A strong, bounded mechanism adaptation uses deliberate compound absence as an active, protected recovery phase with measurement-gated reintroduction, preserved biological context, distinct falsifiers, and proportionate safety controls. Its main unresolved issue is external novelty and prior-art evidence, not structural or causal fit."}