{"schema_version":1,"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp04_external_evaluation_20260802","source_assessment_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__logistics_supply_chain:RETRIEVAL_FIRST:v0","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__logistics_supply_chain","search_queries":["site:docs.aws.amazon.com AWS Supply Chain demand plan forecast overrides start date end date reason code","site:aws.amazon.com AWS Supply Chain override retention demand planning","site:docs.oracle.com service parts planning retain manual forecast overrides overwrite time fence","forecast manual adjustments supply chain accuracy judgmental adjustments 60000 forecasts study","EP4528530A1 planning override validity snapshot patent","site:bls.gov ecec March 2026 December 2025 management professional hourly compensation","site:aws.amazon.com supply chain pricing teammate type contact sales quote 2026","NIST audit record retention access control deletion recovery official guidance","\"Effective forecasting and judgmental adjustments\" 60,000 forecasts four supply-chain companies DOI","site:sciencedirect.com \"Good and bad judgment in forecasting\"","site:researchgate.net \"Good and Bad Judgment in Forecasting: Lessons from Four Companies\"","site:hero.epa.gov/reference/7175793"],"sources":[{"source_id":"S1","title":"Demand plan - AWS Supply Chain","publisher":"Amazon Web Services","url":"https://docs.aws.amazon.com/connect-decisions/legacy/userguide/changing_category.html","source_class":"OFFICIAL_PRODUCT_DOCUMENTATION","publication_date":"n.d.","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["Manual forecast overrides are automatically saved and reapplied in the next planning cycle.","A reason code is mandatory for an override, while imported overrides additionally require start and end dates.","AWS exposes override history and hierarchy-wide effects, and finalized demand plans can be published downstream."]},{"source_id":"S2","title":"AWS Supply Chain adds new override retention capability","publisher":"Amazon Web Services","url":"https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2023/09/aws-supply-chain-override-retention-capability/","source_class":"OFFICIAL_PRODUCT_DOCUMENTATION","publication_date":"2023-09-14","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["AWS introduced automatic saving and reapplication of manual forecast overrides across planning cycles.","Demand planners are the identified users and can manage retained overrides in a unified view.","AWS describes overrides as responses to promotions, seasonality, and other demand variations and frames the feature as reducing recurring manual effort and guesswork."]},{"source_id":"S3","title":"Oracle Service Parts Planning Implementation and User's Guide","publisher":"Oracle","url":"https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26401_01/doc.122/e48778/T515331T515343.htm","source_class":"OFFICIAL_PRODUCT_DOCUMENTATION","publication_date":"n.d.","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["Oracle controls later-run treatment of manual forecast edits through plan-level settings: ignore all, retain all, or retain only inside the planning time fence.","Retained edits are applied over a newly generated forecast.","Overrides can feed a subsequent service-parts plan that recommends replenishments, demonstrating downstream operational coupling."]},{"source_id":"S4","title":"What If Scenario Planning - Setup (EP 4528530 A1)","publisher":"European Patent Office","url":"https://data.epo.org/publication-server/rest/v1.2/publication-dates/2025-03-26/patents/EP4528530NWA1/document.pdf","source_class":"GOVERNMENT_OR_REGULATOR","publication_date":"2025-03-26","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["The application describes base and scenario override snapshot chains with explicit validity periods and fallback to a base value when a scenario has no override.","It describes determining and propagating changes to dependent computed locations.","It does not establish evidence-based owner renewal, a gate against live order or allocation commitments, or post-expiry quarantine as one operational workflow."]},{"source_id":"S5","title":"Effective forecasting and judgmental adjustments: an empirical evaluation and strategies for improvement in supply-chain planning","publisher":"University of Manchester Research Explorer","url":"https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/publications/effective-forecasting-and-judgmental-adjustments-an-empirical-eva/","source_class":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","publication_date":"2009-01","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["The peer-reviewed study analyzed more than 60,000 forecasts and outcomes from four supply-chain companies.","Judgmental adjustment was a common part of computerized demand-planning workflows and consumed management effort.","Average effects were heterogeneous: adjustments improved accuracy in three companies, but smaller adjustments often damaged accuracy and upward adjustments showed optimism bias."]},{"source_id":"S6","title":"Profit Implications of Judgmental Adjustments to Forecast Inputs: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment","publisher":"INFORMS / Management Science","url":"https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.2024.06321","source_class":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","publication_date":"2025-07-25","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["A large-scale spare-parts retail field experiment found forecast-input overrides increased profitability by 4.92 percent on average versus automation without human intervention.","Override value varied with SKU margin, lifecycle, and supplier size.","Operational and profit outcomes can diverge from forecast-accuracy outcomes, making blanket expiry and accuracy-only evaluation unsafe."]},{"source_id":"S7","title":"Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Systems and Organizations (NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 3)","publisher":"National Institute of Standards and Technology","url":"https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/800-171r3/NIST.SP.800-171r3.html","source_class":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","publication_date":"2024-05","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["NIST calls for generating audit records and retaining them consistently with an applicable records-retention policy.","It calls for protecting audit information from unauthorized access, modification, and deletion and restricting audit-management access to privileged roles.","This is a conditional control model for covered information, not a universal legal mandate for commercial planning overrides."]},{"source_id":"S8","title":"Employer Costs for Employee Compensation - December 2025","publisher":"U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics","url":"https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_03202026.htm","source_class":"GOVERNMENT_OR_REGULATOR","publication_date":"2026-03-20","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["December 2025 private-industry total compensation averaged $77.22 per hour for management, professional, and related occupations.","The corresponding figure was $86.61 per hour for management, business, and financial occupations.","These figures provide a public resource-equivalent labor basis for broad 2026 cost bands, but do not estimate vendor licensing or organization-specific integration costs."]}],"problem_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"Direct product documentation establishes that forecast overrides can persist and be reapplied across cycles and can affect published forecasts and replenishment planning. Research across more than 60,000 forecasts shows that manual adjustments are common, effortful, heterogeneous, and sometimes accuracy-reducing. This supports a material governance risk, but no opened source measures the prevalence of ownerless, rationale-stale overrides or directly attributes service failures to their persistence; that part remains an inference requiring proprietary workflow data.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S5","S6"]},"stakeholder_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"AWS explicitly identifies demand planners and existing AWS Supply Chain customers as users of cross-cycle override management and frames reduced manual effort, guesswork, excess inventory, and waste as needs. Oracle documents planner control over override persistence and replenishment effects. This identifies a credible adopter class and operational authorizers in demand/supply-planning governance, but no named customer has requested the proposed linked lease, dependency gate, and quarantine workflow.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3"]},"prior_art":{"proximity":"SUBSTANTIAL_COLLISION","closest_analogues":[{"name":"AWS Supply Chain Demand Planning override lifecycle","similarity":"Already combines cross-cycle persistence, required reason codes, imported start and end dates, history, downstream publication, and visibility of override effects.","remaining_difference":"The opened documentation does not require affirmative evidence-based renewal by a named owner, block expiry against live order or allocation dependencies, or quarantine an expired value for authorized restoration.","source_ids":["S1","S2"]},{"name":"Oracle Service Parts Planning manual-override retention controls","similarity":"Controls whether overrides survive later plan runs, selectively retains them within a planning time fence, reapplies retained edits to regenerated forecasts, and carries overrides into replenishment planning.","remaining_difference":"The control is plan-level overwrite behavior rather than a per-override renewable lease linked to owner evidence, live-commitment gating, and reversible quarantine.","source_ids":["S3"]},{"name":"Validity-bounded scenario override snapshot chains","similarity":"Uses versioned base and scenario snapshots, validity periods, fallback values, and propagation to dependent calculated locations.","remaining_difference":"It concerns scenario representation and calculated-value dependencies, not accountable expiry of operational overrides against live orders or allocations with evidence-backed renewal and recoverable retirement.","source_ids":["S4"]}],"distinctive_claim_remaining":"Relative to documented date-bounded, retained, and versioned overrides, the remaining falsifiable claim is that an integrated default-expiring lease requiring fresh evidence from a named owner, combined with a pre-expiry gate against live committed-order or allocation dependencies and a recoverable post-expiry quarantine, will reduce active overrides lacking a current rationale without increasing expiry-attributable service hazards.","confidence":"HIGH"},"implementation_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"Required primitives already exist separately: override dates, reasons and history; cross-cycle persistence; base-value fallback; versioned snapshots; and downstream planning relationships. A shadow workflow is therefore technically plausible. The hard unresolved work is identity resolution at override × SKU-location-period, reliable mapping to live orders and allocations, authorized restoration, retention-policy alignment, and prevention of rubber-stamp renewal. NIST supports access-controlled audit design only as conditional guidance. No universal legal prohibition was found, but production deletion or quarantine requires organization-specific records, privacy, discovery, contractual, and segregation-of-duties review.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S7"]},"scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":4,"rationale":"Persistent overrides can affect forecasts and replenishment, while empirical studies show adjustments can materially help or harm. Potential impact is high, but the prevalence and causal cost of stale overrides remain unmeasured.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S5","S6"]},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":3,"rationale":"Demand planners already use and manage retained overrides, and AWS expresses a need to reduce manual effort and guesswork. Pull for the exact integrated workflow has not been demonstrated by a named adopter.","source_ids":["S2","S3"]},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"The linked renewal, live-commitment gate, and quarantine could improve accountability and safety over simple retention or expiry, but its advantage over disciplined existing review has not been measured.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4"]},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"No opened source contains all three linked controls, but most data and lifecycle primitives are established prior practice and bounded web search cannot establish worldwide novelty.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4"]},"technical_implementability":{"score":4,"rationale":"Dates, reasons, history, fallback values, snapshots, and downstream relationships are documented capabilities. Completeness of live commitment mapping is the main technical uncertainty.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4"]},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"Planning-process owners and governance leads can plausibly authorize rules and a pilot, while named override owners can renew or request restoration. Cross-functional data, legal, and system-administration approvals remain necessary.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S7"]},"evidence_readiness":{"score":3,"rationale":"A retrospective shadow comparison is well bounded, but decisive data are proprietary and require planner adjudication and later live testing.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S5","S6"]},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":4,"rationale":"Dependency blocking, fail-closed handling of unresolved dependencies, read-only evaluation, and recoverable quarantine directly address mistaken expiry. Quarantine itself creates retention and access risk requiring policy controls.","source_ids":["S3","S7"]},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"Per-override rules and automated checks can scale computationally, but owner renewal workload, heterogeneous lease durations, and dependency-data quality may limit organizational scale.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S5","S6"]}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Six-to-eight-week read-only inventory and shadow replay for at most 500 stratified overrides, including data extraction, rule specification, planner adjudication, analysis, and a go/no-go report.","confidence":"MODERATE","assumptions":["Approximately 160-480 combined hours from planning, analytics, engineering, and governance staff.","The organization can export override and planning history without new production integration.","BLS resource-equivalent compensation of roughly $77-$87 per hour is used before organization-specific overhead or vendor charges."],"source_ids":["S1","S3","S8"]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Design and build a non-production lifecycle registry, owner/rationale workflow, dependency-query prototype, shadow dashboard, audit model, and restoration simulation.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Approximately 700-2,500 internal or equivalent external labor hours.","Existing planning identifiers and export interfaces are reusable.","No public source provides vendor customization or licensing prices."],"source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S7","S8"]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"Production integration for one planning domain, including high-availability dependency checks, role-based approval, notifications, quarantine and restore, monitoring, security/legal review, validation, training, and change management.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Approximately 3,000-10,000 labor-equivalent hours across engineering, planning operations, security, legal, testing, and training.","Vendor professional services and licensing may be additional and are not publicly quantified here.","Launch remains limited to one organization and planning domain rather than enterprise-wide rollout."],"source_ids":["S1","S3","S7","S8"]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Policy ownership, renewal and exception administration, monitoring, dependency-quality audits, restore drills, support, periodic lease recalibration, and incremental infrastructure or vendor costs.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Roughly 0.5-2.0 full-time-equivalent staff plus modest infrastructure and support.","The renewal workflow is substantially automated; heavy manual adjudication could exceed this band.","Vendor recurring pricing and archive-storage costs remain unknown."],"source_ids":["S7","S8"]}},"verified_pipeline_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"YES","reason":"Opened product and research sources establish persistent overrides, downstream coupling, widespread manual adjustment, meaningful effort, and heterogeneous harms and benefits. The narrower prevalence of stale rationale-less overrides remains unmeasured.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S5","S6"]},"externally_credible_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"Existing AWS Supply Chain customers and demand planners are a credible adopter class already managing retained overrides; demand, supply, and planning-governance owners are the natural authorizers. A named pilot organization is still absent.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The integrated owner-renewal, live-commitment gate, and reversible-quarantine claim is contrastive to opened prior art and has measurable outcomes and explicit falsifiers.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A capped, read-only retrospective shadow replay can compare current handling, simple fixed expiry, and the full linked workflow without altering production plans or orders.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S5","S6"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposed first step is read-only, treats missing dependency data as a block, and leaves production authority with planning governance. Production activation remains prohibited until dependency recall, retention rules, access controls, and restoration authority are approved.","source_ids":["S3","S7"]},"credible_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"YES","reason":"The four ranges have bounded scopes and labor assumptions anchored to current BLS compensation data. Confidence is low beyond first evidence because public vendor and integration pricing is unavailable.","source_ids":["S8"]}},"next_evidence_step":"With one consenting planning organization, run a six-to-eight-week read-only retrospective over one completed planning cycle and at most 500 overrides stratified by override type, age, SKU lifecycle, supplier, and location. Compare (A) existing review and retention, (B) a simple fixed-expiry rule, and (C) the full evidence-backed owner-renewal plus live-commitment gate plus quarantine workflow. Measure owner/rationale completeness, override age, simulated renewals, dependency blocks, unresolved dependencies, planner agreement, review minutes, changes to forecast/replenishment/allocation outputs, and plausible service hazards. Require blinded planner adjudication of every simulated expiry and every apparent missed dependency. Pre-register falsifiers: the problem is not supported if at least 95 percent of sampled active overrides have accountable owners and current rationales, cease when their conditions end, and show no material downstream distortion; the incremental workflow fails if it does not reduce rationale-less active overrides versus A, does not reduce missed commitment hazards versus B, misses any known service-critical dependency in the reviewed sample, or creates review burden above a partner-approved threshold. Do not deactivate, delete, release, or change any production plan, order, or allocation.","blocking_evidence":["Proprietary prevalence and age distribution of active forecast, safety-stock, and allocation overrides.","Completeness and recall of mappings from each override to live committed orders, allocations, replenishment releases, and hidden external dependencies.","Planner-adjudicated evidence that active rationales are stale rather than merely old or sparsely documented.","Causal evidence from a later authorized reversible live pilot that rationale-less overrides fall without increasing service failures, inventory harm, or lost beneficial adjustments.","Organization-specific records-retention, legal-hold, privacy, contractual, segregation-of-duties, and permanent-disposition requirements.","Named adopter commitment, acceptable renewal workload, integration/API availability, and vendor licensing or professional-services quotes."],"research_disposition":"PARTNERED_RESEARCH_PROGRAM","world_novelty_boundary":"The opened sources establish end-dated and reason-coded forecast overrides, cross-cycle persistence, plan-level selective retention, fallback to regenerated or base values, versioned validity-bounded snapshots, and propagation to dependent planning values as prior practice. They did not establish the narrower integrated operational workflow of mandatory evidence-based owner renewal, automated gating against live committed orders or allocations, and recoverable post-expiry quarantine. This is only a bounded-search distinction. Worldwide novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, and realized impact remain unmeasured.","arm":"RETRIEVAL_FIRST","candidate_version":0,"controller_recommendation":{"action":"STOP_EMPIRICAL_RESEARCH_NEEDED","repairable":true,"material_progress_observed":true,"progress_targets":["Secure a named planning-process owner, data steward, and governance authorizer for a read-only study.","Resolve override identity, owner, rationale, lifecycle dates, and commitment-dependency status for at least 95 percent of the capped sample; unresolved dependencies must remain blocked.","Complete the three-way shadow comparison and blinded planner adjudication without changing production state.","Show fewer rationale-less active overrides under the full workflow than under current handling and fewer missed commitment hazards than under simple fixed expiry.","Demonstrate zero known service-critical dependencies missed by the gate in the reviewed sample and quantify false blocks, restoration cases, and review burden.","Obtain organization-specific retention, access-control, legal-hold, restoration, and final-disposition approval plus credible vendor/integration quotes before any live pilot."],"reason":"Bounded web research has established the problem class, adopter class, substantial prior-art collision, residual testable claim, and a technically plausible read-only study. The remaining decisive questions concern proprietary override prevalence, dependency completeness, planner behavior, operational outcomes, authority, and implementation pricing; they require partnered data access and field testing rather than further general web search."}}