{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp05_complete_proposal_portfolio20_20260803","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__cognitive_science","portfolio_valid":true,"proposal_assessments":[{"proposal_index":1,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Operationally specifies actors, observable states, lifecycle states, dependency gates, exceptions, reversible disposition, restoration tests, authority, falsifiers, and a bounded pilot. It faithfully governs accumulated protocol artifacts whose stale active status threatens valid assembly while preserving reconstruction."},{"proposal_index":2,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Fully specifies inference leases, semantic expiry triggers, archival separation, dependency protection, exceptions, rollback, reconstruction, authority, and offline comparison. It manages accumulated evidence layers rather than merely applying activation decay, and uniquely targets stale evidence influencing adaptive state estimation."},{"proposal_index":3,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Provides a complete governed lifecycle for sequential handoff cues, including bounded active capacity, renewal, safe demotion, holds, dependency checks, quarantine, tombstones, restoration, simulation, and falsifiers. Its causal path runs through attentional competition and shared situation-model distortion."},{"proposal_index":4,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Completely defines element identity, review leases, execution tracing, dependency-gated shadow disabling, archival packages, exceptions, rollback, restoration, authority, and benchmark evidence. It faithfully retires accumulated executable model commitments while preserving reproducible historical simulations."},{"proposal_index":5,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Operationally covers scaffold contracts, staleness review, dependency and accommodation gates, graduated access states, reversible withdrawal, archival reconstruction, authority, rivals, risks, and sandbox tests. It addresses accumulated instructional supports and the distinction between supported performance and independent competence."}],"pairwise_assessments":[{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":2,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 prevents superseded protocol artifacts from being assembled into an incompatible study package through an artifact lifecycle registry; proposal 2 uses inference leases to remove stale behavioral evidence from a live adaptive estimator while retaining historical reconstruction."},{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":3,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 governs scientific protocol-version selection and reproducibility; proposal 3 governs a capacity-bounded operational handoff display where stale cues consume attention and distort incoming operators' situation models."},{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":4,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 manages stored artifacts selected to configure research, whereas proposal 4 instruments reachable executable rules and shadow-disables obsolete theoretical commitments that continue causally participating in simulations."},{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":5,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 separates current protocol authority from reconstructive history; proposal 5 progressively fades learner-facing scaffolds after pedagogical and accommodation dependencies are checked so supported performance is not confused with independent competence."},{"proposal_a":2,"proposal_b":3,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 2 changes which historical observations participate in machine estimation through evidence leases; proposal 3 changes which human-authored operational cues occupy an attention-limited handoff surface through owner review and safe tier demotion."},{"proposal_a":2,"proposal_b":4,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 2 governs accumulated empirical evidence entering a user's current latent-state estimate; proposal 4 governs accumulated executable mechanisms inside the cognitive model that generate traces and predictions."},{"proposal_a":2,"proposal_b":5,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 2 expires evidence from current inference while preserving observations; proposal 5 fades prompts and aids from the learner's task environment using scaffold-reduced probes and recoverable access tiers."},{"proposal_a":3,"proposal_b":4,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 3 manages externalized prospective-memory cues to protect shared operational awareness; proposal 4 manages internal executable model elements to protect causal attribution and theoretical interpretability."},{"proposal_a":3,"proposal_b":5,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 3 retires resolved or superseded handoff cues so operators attend to current conditions; proposal 5 withdraws pedagogical scaffolds so learners retrieve procedures independently, with mastery probes and accommodation overrides."},{"proposal_a":4,"proposal_b":5,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 4 applies trace-gated retirement to production rules and other executable scientific commitments; proposal 5 applies dependency-gated, graduated fading to learner-visible instructional supports."}],"replacement_indices":[],"rationale":"All five proposals are operationally complete and preserve the archetype's essential causal structure: sequential accumulation, changing usefulness, explicit lifecycle states and expiry triggers, differentiated archival or retirement paths, dependency and exception gates, reversible cleanup, surviving audit evidence, and revalidation. Although they deliberately share archetypal safeguards, they address distinct affected problems with distinct interventions and causal paths: protocol assembly, adaptive evidence inference, shift-handoff attention, executable-model attribution, and scaffold-dependent learning. All ten pairs therefore constitute independent opportunities."}