{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_four_proposal_generalization60_20260803","source_assessment_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__film_media_production:P1:v0","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__film_media_production","proposal_index":1,"qualification":"EMPIRICAL_PARTNER_CANDIDATE","criteria":{"specific_differentiated_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The remaining claim is specific and falsifiable: enforceable fragment routing plus guarantee-preserving labels should avoid stronger-than-warranted verdicts that sampled playback, fixed-timeout Boolean failure, or Boolean static-analysis interfaces produce on seeded cases."},"credible_problem_signal":{"status":"YES","reason":"Production visual-script defects, difficult branching-narrative consistency, blocking media-package validation, and active development of every-path narrative verification provide credible external signal, although the exact Boolean-timeout failure mode and its prevalence remain unverified."},"identifiable_partner_or_adopter":{"status":"YES","reason":"An interactive-narrative tool vendor, studio production pipeline, distributor, or platform operator with release-preflight authority is a concrete partner class able to provide actual player semantics, authorized package copies, current verdict behavior, and workflow participants."},"partner_access_is_necessary":{"status":"YES","reason":"Public evidence cannot determine whether real pipelines assert the disputed universal guarantee, preserve UNKNOWN states, support useful narratives within the finite fragment, or can operationally accept the router; resolving those questions requires proprietary runtime, package, and workflow access."},"safe_authorized_first_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A non-production parallel study can use synthetic fixtures and authorized package copies while retaining human release authority, prohibiting prototype-driven releases or creative changes, protecting scripts and traces, and halting on false clearance, misrouting, label collapse, or semantic mismatch."},"bounded_decisive_empirical_design":{"status":"YES","reason":"The preregistered 16-fixture comparator, independent reduction review, and a small controlled partner extension using at least two stakeholder-relevant narratives provide explicit comparators, recorded outputs, success thresholds, and halt conditions."},"no_material_negative_gate":{"status":"YES","reason":"No verified pipeline gate is materially NO: the testable claim, bounded evidence step, safety and authority controls, and cost scope pass, while problem prevalence and adopter credibility remain uncertain rather than contradicted."},"not_merely_more_research":{"status":"YES","reason":"The next work is operationally specified: freeze one grammar and player model, independently review the reduction, implement the checker/router, execute preregistered fixtures, and run authorized package copies while measuring routing, labels, coverage, resource use, and reviewer outcomes."}},"uncertainty_types":["PROBLEM_PREVALENCE","ADOPTER_PULL","INCREMENTAL_EFFECT","WORKFLOW_FIT","DATA_ACCESS"],"partner_profile":"A narrative-tool vendor, interactive-media studio, distributor, or platform operator that controls an executable-player model and preflight workflow, can authorize non-production use of package copies, and can involve pipeline engineering, narrative design, release approval, and asset-clearance roles.","required_access":"A frozen real player and package-semantics specification; current preflight result and timeout handling; securely authorized copies of at least two pilot-relevant interactive narratives; fragment and plug-in configuration; asset-registry assumptions; and blinded judgments from release, narrative, engineering, and clearance participants.","bounded_empirical_test":"With one authorized partner, independently review the model-matched reduction, run the proposed router and three comparators on the 16 preregistered synthetic fixtures, then conduct a non-production parallel run on at least two partner-relevant package copies. Record membership, explored states, bounds, certificates or replays, raw and presented labels, semantic divergences, UNKNOWN and false-alarm rates, resource use, and reviewer judgments; prototype results cannot authorize release.","success_condition":"The reduction passes independent review; no seeded or known violating trace receives CLEAR; no package is misrouted; every exhausted unrestricted search remains UNKNOWN; no encoded transition is omitted; at least two partner-relevant narratives are expressible without an unrestricted escape hatch; and participants judge the differentiated labels usable without collapsing them into Boolean release decisions.","falsification_condition":"Reject the claim if the reduction fails semantic review, fragment membership is bypassed, any known violation is cleared, any exhausted search becomes PASS or FAIL, the checker omits deployed behavior, fewer than two relevant narratives fit the fragment, comparators match the router without label collapse on all decisive cases, or partner workflow cannot preserve the labels and human authority.","rationale":"Substantial adjacent prior art prevents treating the design as established novelty, but it does not eliminate the proposal's narrow contrastive claim about coupling a reviewed computability boundary, enforceable exact fragment, one-sided unrestricted analysis, and non-collapsible release labels. The remaining uncertainties concern real runtime semantics, workflow prevalence, useful fragment coverage, comparative errors, and adopter acceptance. Those are empirically decidable only with an authorized pipeline partner, and the supplied controls support a bounded, reversible, comparator-based study."}