{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_four_proposal_generalization60_20260803","cell_id":"bounded_rivalry_governance__nanotechnology","portfolio_valid":true,"proposal_assessments":[{"proposal_index":1,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Operationally specifies the scarce integration slot, eligible rivals, common-wafer arena, scoring and safety gates, due process, anti-abuse controls, spillover accounting, resource caps, winner review, reopening, and a reversible shadow test. Its causal path governs competition for shared fabrication capacity by making reproducible common-condition process performance the route to winning."},{"proposal_index":2,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Operationally specifies a finite utility contract, vendor eligibility, standardized assays, lifecycle scoring, safety floors, secured remediation, collusion monitoring, appeals, interface protection, reserve supply, reopening, and a shadow tender. Its procurement and lifecycle-cost-transfer problem is distinct from facility access, research prizes, and standards designation."},{"proposal_index":3,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Operationally specifies a scarce demonstration award, open but bounded catalyst-design arena, endurance metrics, hidden validation, resource caps, failure accounting, safety and cleanup duties, milestone awards, sanctions, appeals, challenge, and retrospective testing. Its causal path changes a publication-priority research race into an outcome-contingent, resource-bounded endurance prize."},{"proposal_index":4,"complete":true,"causally_faithful":true,"materially_distinct":true,"reason":"Operationally specifies a time-limited reference designation, candidate eligibility, independently operated round-robin trials, scoring and noncompensable floors, audits, resource limits, anti-abuse rules, appeals, interoperability conditions, competition review, and reopening. Its problem and causal path concern epistemic default selection and standards capture, not access, purchasing, or material discovery."}],"pairwise_assessments":[{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":2,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 allocates scarce shared nanofabrication capacity among research teams through common-wafer process replication; proposal 2 awards a utility supply contract through a bonded lifecycle tender, standardized product assays, and switching safeguards."},{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":3,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 corrects unreliable allocation of an existing fabrication bay through equal facility trials; proposal 3 corrects publication- and peak-result-driven research selection through an outcome-contingent catalyst endurance prize with capped discovery inputs."},{"proposal_a":1,"proposal_b":4,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 1 governs rivalry for physical fabrication access and selects a process; proposal 4 governs rivalry for temporary measurement-reference status through independent interlaboratory transfer testing and anti-lock-in conditions."},{"proposal_a":2,"proposal_b":3,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 2 addresses commercial bidding, lifecycle cost dumping, and supplier lock-in through procurement terms and liability; proposal 3 addresses a scientific priority and resource arms race through a sponsor-created achievement prize and endurance validation."},{"proposal_a":2,"proposal_b":4,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 2 purchases nano-adsorbent products and governs price, service, externalities, and supplier continuity; proposal 4 selects an epistemic reporting default and governs method transferability, uncertainty, interoperability, and standards capture."},{"proposal_a":3,"proposal_b":4,"same_problem":false,"same_intervention":false,"independent_opportunity":true,"key_difference":"Proposal 3 rewards creation and validation of a durable nanocatalyst through a capped inducement prize; proposal 4 compares existing measurement systems for a fixed-term designation through a balanced interlaboratory league and competition review."}],"replacement_indices":[],"rationale":"All four proposals are operationally complete and preserve the archetype's full causal structure: each defines a purposeful scarce contest, legitimate entry and actions, meaningful scoring, fair process, anti-sabotage and anti-collusion controls, spillover constraints, escalation dampers, winner-power review, and recalibration. Although they share archetypal guardrails, they govern four independently adoptable rivalries with different affected problems, interventions, and causal paths: fabrication-capacity allocation, lifecycle procurement, research-prize discovery, and measurement-standard designation."}