{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_full320_20260801","cell_id":"negative_space_design__systems_cybernetics","trajectory_id":"R","attempt_index":0,"candidate_sha256":"59093c3544b0197188957df25cae9b330858aa945499b678f27f70c4771d6693","gates":{"G1":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The independently observable problem is continuous operator-channel crowding associated with delayed deviation recognition; it does not depend on describing the proposed quiet-view intervention."},"G2":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Routine presentation is the omission candidate, policy-protected quiescence is the bounded absence, deviations are the positive form, and explicit reveal and liveness rules preserve recoverability and meaning."},"G3":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Reducing competition in the human-facing channel can plausibly increase deviation salience and shorten recognition, while the candidate appropriately treats classification reliability and precursor loss as empirical contingencies."},"G4":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Every archetype component has a domain realization, and the selected mechanisms retain their distinctive functions: disciplined cutting, protected hiding, absence diagnosis, bounded rest, and safe reintroduction."},"G5":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Empirical claims are bounded as hypotheses or inferences, prior-art status is explicitly unsearched, no unsupported citation or established-effect claim appears, and uncertainty is carried into the proposed test."},"G6":{"status":"PASS","reason":"The problem falsifier tests whether crowding predicts impaired detection, whereas the intervention falsifier separately tests whether protected quiescence improves outcomes without new misses, confusion, or recovery impairment."},"G7":{"status":"PASS","reason":"Initial testing is non-live and authorized, critical alarms and controls are excluded from suppression, records remain intact, affected parties are named, and halt and rollback conditions are explicit."}},"scores":{"structural_fit":{"score":4,"reason":"The intervention uses deliberate, protected, meaningful absence as the active structural lever rather than merely simplifying or reprioritizing the display."},"domain_fidelity":{"score":3,"reason":"Human supervisory monitoring, observability, liveness, feedback presentation, and intervention timing fit cybernetic practice, though the formulation relies more heavily on operator-interface concepts than on an explicit system model."},"causal_plausibility":{"score":3,"reason":"The attention-separation chain is coherent and testable, but its benefit depends on reliable message classification and on precursor information not requiring continuous joint inspection."},"component_translation":{"score":4,"reason":"The component map is complete, specific, and mutually coherent, with boundaries, context, absence meaning, accessibility, testing, and reintroduction all translated into monitoring operations."},"adversarial_survival":{"score":4,"reason":"The candidate directly addresses missing sensors, bad thresholds, staffing, expert use of density, precursor suppression, observability failure, drill transfer, and unequal recovery access."},"reframing_gain":{"score":4,"reason":"Treating healthy quiet as a designed and independently verified monitoring state exposes a useful alternative to continuous display and mental filtering."},"practicality_testability":{"score":4,"reason":"A bounded crossover replay test specifies the comparator, seeded deviations, operational outcomes, reveal behavior, confusion checks, and rollback criteria."},"expected_value_risk":{"score":3,"reason":"The non-live first step is low risk and potentially valuable, while any live deployment retains material false-negative, confidence, precursor, and skill-erosion hazards."},"novelty_evidence":{"score":0,"reason":"No prior-art search, comparative literature, or other novelty evidence is supplied; the candidate correctly marks this boundary rather than asserting novelty."}},"weighted_total":86.25,"disposition":"DEEP_RESEARCH","fabrication_findings":[],"weak_dimensions":["novelty_evidence"],"actionable_critique":[{"priority":"MEDIUM","issue":"Novelty relative to alarm management, exception reporting, supervisory control, and human-factors monitoring practice is unknown.","repair":"Before making any novelty claim, conduct a scoped prior-art comparison and identify whether the protected quiet state, independent liveness framing, and automatic context reintroduction form a distinct combination.","evidence_boundary":"The packet explicitly reports unsearched prior art, so novelty cannot be inferred from the closed-book structural evaluation."}],"repairs":[],"improvement_attribution":{"kind":"NONE","reason":"This is an original attempt with no prior repair record, and neither the problem identifier nor the causal-lever identifier changed."},"trajectory_replacement":false,"arm_guess":"MECHANISM_PACKET","recommendation":"SUCCESS","tester_summary":"The candidate is structurally faithful, causally coherent, component-complete, falsifiable, and safely testable. Its principal unresolved boundary is novelty, with additional empirical uncertainty around classification reliability and precursor preservation."}