{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp04_retrieval_first_paired20_20260802","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__aviation_aeronautics","considered_ids":["H2","H3"],"selected_id":"H2","dispositions":[{"hypothesis_id":"H2","lane":"FINALIST","reason":"Despite substantial collision on its component mechanisms, the critic identifies a material, repairable residual: a certification-specific closed loop combining ranked bundle aging, hard inbound-dependency gating, reversible quarantine, and recurring restore proof. Its 40% hot-storage reduction and 95% reproducibility-within-restore-time targets make the distinction narrow and falsifiable, while the sources directly establish the underlying storage, provenance, certification-retention, and regeneration problem."},{"hypothesis_id":"H3","lane":"COLLISION","reason":"The sources already establish event-sensitive retention, phase and channel differentiation, anomaly-responsive storage, and investigation overrides. The remaining post-ingestion orchestration is bounded but depends on a broader combination of scoring, reconstruction context, holds, restore validation, and preservation of both predefined-event and weak-precursor detection, making it less sharply isolated than H2."}],"selection_reason":"H2 offers the clearest source-supported and measurable residual claim within a recognizable aerospace-certification problem. The selection is limited to the four-part lifecycle orchestration and its stated storage-and-restore performance test, not the already-established component practices."}