{"schema_version":1,"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp05_external_evaluation_20260803","source_assessment_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__robotics_automation:P4:v0","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__robotics_automation","search_queries":["site:osha.gov autonomous mobile robots hazards risk assessment workplace mobile robots","ISO 3691-4 mobile robots zones speed limits official","autonomous mobile robot map zones speed limit geofence official documentation","temporary geofence lifecycle expiration robot fleet map research","site:mobile-industrial-robots.com user guide zones maps speed preferred forbidden update facility","site:docs.omron.com mobile robot restricted zones map speed zones map change","site:ottomotors.com geofence speed zone fleet manager documentation robot","AMR fleet map no-go zones temporary construction operations documentation","robot fleet map change management rollback AMR official guide","site:mobile-industrial-robots.com \"map\" \"change\" \"risk assessment\" AMR","site:automate.org AMR safety risk assessment map changes zones","site:nist.gov robot configuration management maps mobile robot cybersecurity","site:bls.gov 2026 employer costs employee compensation professional related occupations March 2026","site:bls.gov May 2025 occupational employment wages health and safety engineers software developers","multi robot path restriction congestion detour throughput empirical study warehouse AMR","AMR restricted zone path planning throughput congestion study"],"sources":[{"source_id":"S1","title":"OSHA Technical Manual, Section IV, Chapter 4: Industrial Robots and Robot System Safety","publisher":"U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration","url":"https://www.osha.gov/otm/section-4-safety-hazards/chapter-4","source_class":"GOVERNMENT_OR_REGULATOR","publication_date":"undated","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["Industrial mobile robots operate in workplaces and may share space with workers.","Robot applications require comprehensive, task-based hazard analysis and risk assessment.","Employers, integrators, operators, maintenance personnel, and affected workers have identifiable safety roles.","Risk-reduction measures must follow the application-specific assessment rather than operational performance alone."]},{"source_id":"S2","title":"ISO 3691-4:2023—Industrial trucks—Safety requirements and verification—Part 4: Driverless industrial trucks and their systems","publisher":"International Organization for Standardization","url":"https://www.iso.org/standard/83545.html","source_class":"STANDARD","publication_date":"2023-06","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["ISO 3691-4 applies to automated guided vehicles and autonomous mobile robots.","Driverless industrial trucks and their systems are subject to specified safety requirements and verification.","Any restriction-removal process remains subordinate to applicable system-safety requirements."]},{"source_id":"S3","title":"VDA 5050 Version 3.0.0: Interface for Communication Between Mobile Robots and a Fleet Control","publisher":"Verband der Automobilindustrie and Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau","url":"https://github.com/VDA5050/VDA5050/blob/main/VDA5050_EN.md","source_class":"STANDARD","publication_date":"undated; version 3.0.0","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["Fleet-control interfaces already represent blocked, release-controlled, speed-limit, coordinated-replanning, priority, penalty, and directed zones.","Zone sets have unique identifiers, map associations, active-state reporting, controlled distribution, and replacement semantics.","Map versions and zone-set consistency are technically manageable.","Release-zone permissions can expire or be revoked, although this lease mechanism is not a sunset process for the underlying static zone."]},{"source_id":"S4","title":"LD-250 Platform User's Manual, Revision D","publisher":"OMRON Robotics and Safety Technologies","url":"https://assets.omron.eu/downloads/manual/en/v3/i642_ld-250_user_s_guide_users_manual_en.pdf","source_class":"OFFICIAL_PRODUCT_DOCUMENTATION","publication_date":"undated; revision D","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["Commercial AMR maps include forbidden zones, speed zones, preferred paths, and preferred-direction zones that change robot behavior.","Users with appropriate access can create and edit workspace maps, while operator access can be restricted.","Fleet managers can distribute new maps to robots.","Virtual map constraints do not replace underlying robot safety protocols, physical barriers may still be required, and some speed changes require recommissioning."]},{"source_id":"S5","title":"Navigating with Speed Limits","publisher":"Open Navigation LLC, Navigation2 Project","url":"https://docs.nav2.org/tutorials/docs/navigation2_with_speed_filter.html","source_class":"OFFICIAL_PRODUCT_DOCUMENTATION","publication_date":"undated","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["ROS 2 Navigation2 implements map-annotated speed-restriction areas through a speed-filter mask.","Restriction behavior can be evaluated in a Gazebo-based non-production environment.","Map-cell values can encode percentage or absolute speed limits, supporting controlled replay experiments."]},{"source_id":"S6","title":"AMR Fleet Management: The Integration Layer Explained","publisher":"RBTX, an igus platform","url":"https://learn.rbtx.com/knowledge-resource/amr-fleet-management/","source_class":"COMMERCIAL_FIRST_PARTY","publication_date":"undated","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["AMR navigation maps define navigable space, restricted zones, lanes, destinations, and charging locations.","Temporary staging areas and other floor changes create map-update work.","The publisher expressly recommends formal map-change control specifying authorization, single-robot testing, and rollback.","It characterizes map maintenance as underestimated operational work and identifies bottleneck congestion as a cause of delayed tasks."]},{"source_id":"S7","title":"Multi-Robot Coordination and Layout Design for Automated Warehousing","publisher":"International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence","url":"https://www.ijcai.org/proceedings/2023/611","source_class":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","publication_date":"2023","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["Robot-accessible layout can materially affect congestion and warehouse throughput even with advanced path-planning algorithms.","Simulation experiments found that congestion-reducing layouts improved throughput and, in some cases, supported twice as many robots.","This supports the causal plausibility of route-capacity effects but does not measure stale operational restrictions."]},{"source_id":"S8","title":"Employer Costs per Hour Worked for Employee Compensation of Private-Industry Workers, by Occupational Group, March 2026","publisher":"U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics","url":"https://www.bls.gov/charts/employer-costs-for-employee-compensation/costs-by-occupational-group.htm","source_class":"OFFICIAL_ORGANIZATION_DATA","publication_date":"2026-03","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["March 2026 management, professional, and related labor cost about $78.09 per hour when listed wages and benefit components are summed.","Production, transportation, and material-moving labor cost about $36.27 per hour on the same basis.","These rates provide a public resource-equivalent basis for labor-dominated cost bands."]}],"problem_evidence":{"support":"WEAK","rationale":"The operating mechanism is visible: commercial products and VDA 5050 implement behavior-changing blocked, directed, penalized, and speed-limited map zones; temporary floor changes require map updates; and primary research shows that route layout and congestion affect throughput. However, none of the eight sources directly observes a temporary AMR restriction remaining after its hazard ended, reports its prevalence, or measures the resulting loss. The candidate's exact stale-restriction problem therefore remains plausible but empirically unverified.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S6","S7"]},"stakeholder_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"Fleet users and employers are identifiable adopters, with safety responsibilities assigned by OSHA and configurable access described by OMRON. RBTX expressly calls for formal authorization, testing, and rollback for map changes, demonstrating adjacent operational demand. No source expresses demand, budget, or willingness to adopt recurring evidence-gated sunset reviews specifically, and the proposed joint safety/EHS/facilities authority structure is site-specific rather than externally verified.","source_ids":["S1","S4","S6"]},"prior_art":{"proximity":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","closest_analogues":[{"name":"Commercial AMR map and zone administration","similarity":"OMRON already supports editable forbidden areas, speed zones, preferred paths, permission-limited map administration, fleet distribution, and continued underlying safety behavior.","remaining_difference":"The documentation does not attach hazard provenance, accountable owners, review dates, affirmative renewal criteria, or recurring sunset dispositions to each restriction.","source_ids":["S4"]},{"name":"VDA 5050 map and zone-set lifecycle controls","similarity":"VDA 5050 provides identifiers, controlled fleet distribution, active-state reporting, replacement semantics, map association, and expiration or revocation of release permissions.","remaining_difference":"It manages technical consistency and temporary access leases, not evidence-based retirement of a static zone after its underlying physical hazard ends.","source_ids":["S3"]},{"name":"Formal AMR map-change control","similarity":"RBTX already recommends named authorization, pre-deployment testing, and rollback for facility-map changes, including changes caused by temporary staging.","remaining_difference":"It does not specify a recurring inventory or a renew-revise-retire default for temporary restrictions.","source_ids":["S6"]},{"name":"Robot routing, congestion, and layout optimization","similarity":"Research and existing navigation tooling evaluate how maps, constraints, speed masks, and layout affect feasibility, congestion, and throughput.","remaining_difference":"These approaches optimize routing or layout without first adjudicating whether a safety-related restriction has become obsolete.","source_ids":["S5","S7"]}],"distinctive_claim_remaining":"Within one bounded operating area, adding hazard provenance, an accountable owner, a scheduled review, independent affirmative clearance, and a renew-revise-retire decision to non-baseline static AMR restrictions will identify at least one restriction whose temporary hazard has ended and whose isolated removal improves historical-task replay travel, waiting, energy, or feasibility relative to the unchanged map, without increasing modeled conflicts, displaced traffic exposure, or safety-control violations. The claim is falsified if no such restriction exists, reviewers cannot agree that its hazard ended, it does not change robot behavior, gains do not exceed review costs, or protected outcomes deteriorate.","confidence":"MODERATE"},"implementation_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"Existing products and interfaces make restrictions, maps, versions, access roles, fleet distribution, and simulation technically tractable. A read-only inventory plus isolated replay is implementable without changing production behavior. Workflow feasibility is less certain: map formats differ by vendor, some limits require recommissioning, physical barriers or application-specific safeguards may remain necessary, replay may not reproduce human exposure, and local retention, labor, worker-consultation, cybersecurity, and approval rules were not verified. No general legal prohibition was found, but lawful authority to change a production map remains employer- and site-specific.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S4","S5","S6"]},"scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":3,"rationale":"Routing capacity and congestion can affect throughput materially, but the prevalence and effect size of obsolete restrictions are unmeasured.","source_ids":["S6","S7"]},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":2,"rationale":"Employers and fleet users have relevant responsibilities, and formal map-change control is expressly recommended, but no adopter requests or funds the exact sunset-review process.","source_ids":["S1","S4","S6"]},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"Recurring evidence-gated disposition addresses administrative persistence not covered by ordinary map editing or routing optimization, but its advantage over disciplined existing change control is untested.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S6","S7"]},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"The hazard-linked sunset workflow was not found directly, yet its components closely resemble established zone management, access expiry, and map-change control.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S6"]},"technical_implementability":{"score":4,"rationale":"Zone editing, map versioning, fleet distribution, speed masks, access control, and simulation are documented capabilities; integration effort remains vendor-specific.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S5"]},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"Employers, integrators, fleet administrators, and safety personnel have credible roles, but the proposed joint authorization matrix was not externally validated for a real facility.","source_ids":["S1","S4","S6"]},"evidence_readiness":{"score":4,"rationale":"A capped inventory and one-at-a-time replay can produce an interpretable comparator without live exposure, provided proprietary maps, tickets, telemetry, and reviewers are available.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S5"]},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":4,"rationale":"Affirmative clearance, retained safety protocols, unchanged production maps during first evidence, existing change control, and rollback are well aligned with official safety guidance. Replay alone cannot establish live worker safety.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S4","S6"]},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"A register and review cadence could generalize across mapped fleets, but heterogeneous vendors, site-specific hazards, recurring review labor, and recommissioning requirements limit frictionless scaling.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S6"]}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Read-only inventory of up to 20 restrictions in one area; ticket reconstruction; three-role hazard classification; historical-task replay; incidence and sensitivity analysis; no production change.","confidence":"MODERATE","assumptions":["Approximately 120-400 combined professional and operations hours.","Professional labor is valued near $78 per hour and material-moving labor near $36 per hour using March 2026 BLS compensation components.","Existing map export, logs, replay or simulation environment, and staff access are available.","No new robot hardware or production shutdown is required."],"source_ids":["S4","S5","S8"]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Design and configure a restriction register, metadata schema, ownership workflow, review calendar, role-based access, audit trail, map-version controls, dashboards, and site procedures for one fleet or operating area.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Approximately 500-2,000 internal and vendor professional hours plus modest software integration.","Existing fleet-management tooling can be extended rather than replaced.","The band excludes major safety-system redesign, new sensing hardware, and fleet-wide recommissioning.","Vendor licensing and integration prices were not publicly verified."],"source_ids":["S3","S4","S6","S8"]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Authorized fixed-period pilot in one area, including hazard review, map-change validation, worker communication, monitoring, staged deployment, map backup, restoration drill, and after-action assessment.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["At least one restriction passes the non-production evidence gate.","Approximately 400-1,500 professional and operations hours plus vendor support and bounded downtime.","Existing safety architecture remains unchanged.","Any required physical modification or safety-rated sensing upgrade would move cost beyond this scope."],"source_ids":["S1","S2","S4","S6","S8"]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Periodic reviews, evidence collection, register administration, renewal decisions, audits, refresher communication, and limited replay for one established operating area.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Approximately 120-500 mixed professional and operations hours annually.","Restriction volume remains modest and reviews are distributed through the year.","Major facility redesigns, incident investigations, or expansion to multiple sites are excluded.","Automation reduces clerical work but does not replace hazard-owner judgment."],"source_ids":["S1","S6","S8"]}},"verified_pipeline_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"NO","reason":"Sources verify behavior-changing restrictions, temporary map-update triggers, and congestion consequences, but none verifies the defining condition: a restriction persisting after its temporary hazard ended. This requires site records and physical inspection.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S6","S7"]},"externally_credible_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"Employers and fleet users have safety responsibility; authorized map users and fleet administrators are documented; and formal authorization for map changes is recommended. Exact local signatories still require confirmation.","source_ids":["S1","S4","S6"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The incremental claim distinguishes recurring hazard-linked sunset review from map editing, technical zone versioning, and route optimization, and specifies observable success and failure conditions.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S6","S7"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A maximum-20, one-area, read-only inventory with independent classification and one-at-a-time historical replay has an unchanged-map comparator and stops before production modification.","source_ids":["S4","S5"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposed next step is non-production and read-only. Active, uncertain, permanent, or legally required restrictions remain untouched. Any later live removal remains contingent on application-specific risk assessment, local authorization, validation, and verified rollback.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S4","S6"]},"credible_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"YES","reason":"All four bands define bounded scopes and labor assumptions anchored to March 2026 public compensation data. Confidence is limited by unavailable vendor prices and site complexity, but the ranges are credible as resource-equivalent planning estimates.","source_ids":["S4","S5","S6","S8"]}},"next_evidence_step":"With one willing fleet operator, inventory no more than 20 active non-baseline restrictions in one physically bounded area. Record zone identifier, map and zone-set version, creator, date, hazard purpose, ticket, owner, intended duration, affected workers, and renewal evidence. Safety, facilities, and area operations independently classify each hazard as active, cleared, or uncertain; disagreement defaults to uncertain. For each unanimously cleared candidate, compare the unchanged production-map baseline with a non-production replay in which only that restriction is absent, using the same historical tasks, fleet size, robot parameters, traffic rules, and all other safeguards. Measure route feasibility, distance, travel and waiting time, conflicts, deadlocks, energy proxy, traffic displacement, reviewer hours, and affected-party incidence. Falsify the problem if no restriction is both affirmatively cleared and behavior-changing. Falsify the intervention if classification is not reproducible, conservative benefits do not exceed review cost, removal produces no improvement, traffic or exposure is merely displaced, replay leaves its approved boundary, map identity cannot be verified, or applicable change control cannot support tested restoration. End without modifying production; a later live pilot requires separate authorization.","blocking_evidence":["No direct external evidence establishes that temporary AMR geofences, route blocks, direction rules, or speed caps commonly persist after their hazards end.","No operator has supplied a restriction inventory, provenance records, hazard-clearance judgments, map versions, or telemetry for this candidate.","No adopter has expressed demand or budget for the exact recurring evidence-gated sunset workflow.","The proposed joint safety, EHS, facilities, area-manager, and map-administrator authority matrix has not been validated at a real site.","Replay fidelity for worker exposure, intermittent hazards, multi-zone interactions, and vendor-specific rollback remains unverified.","No realized benefit, safety outcome, adoption rate, or recurring review burden has been measured."],"research_disposition":"PROBLEM_PREVALENCE_STUDY","world_novelty_boundary":"The search found adjacent zone-management standards, commercial map editing, technical versioning, temporary access expiry, formal map-change control, and routing optimization. It did not find this exact hazard-linked recurring sunset workflow, but bounded web search cannot establish world novelty or absence. World novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, and realized impact remain unmeasured.","arm":"COMPLETE_PROPOSAL_PORTFOLIO","candidate_version":0,"controller_recommendation":{"action":"STOP_EMPIRICAL_RESEARCH_NEEDED","repairable":false,"material_progress_observed":true,"progress_targets":["Obtain a proprietary one-area inventory of up to 20 active non-baseline restrictions with map versions and provenance.","Measure the fraction classified independently as active, cleared, uncertain, and behavior-changing.","Demonstrate reproducible hazard-status agreement among authorized safety, facilities, and operations reviewers.","Run unchanged-map versus one-at-a-time removal replays on a fixed historical task set and report effects with uncertainty.","Compare recovered operational value with reviewer, integration, validation, and worker-incidence costs.","Document the site's actual map-change authority, worker-consultation requirements, validation pathway, version controls, and tested restoration procedure.","Secure an explicit adopter statement covering willingness to continue, conditions for a live pilot, and available budget."],"reason":"Web evidence establishes technical plausibility, adjacent operational need, implementable comparators, relevant authorities, and close prior art, but cannot verify the candidate's defining prevalence condition or effect. Resolution requires proprietary maps and tickets, physical hazard inspection, authorized reviewer judgments, and replay or live operational data. Under the required controller rule, this fieldwork dependency mandates STOP_EMPIRICAL_RESEARCH_NEEDED and repairable false."},"proposal_index":4}