{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_four_proposal_generalization60_20260803","source_assessment_id":"catalytic_pathway_enablement__mathematics:P2:v0","cell_id":"catalytic_pathway_enablement__mathematics","proposal_index":2,"qualification":"EMPIRICAL_PARTNER_CANDIDATE","criteria":{"specific_differentiated_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposal makes a specific, comparator-defined, falsifiable claim that a capped rotating two-specialist clinic can reduce preparation labor or elapsed time versus equal-access ad hoc handoffs without increasing fidelity defects, reopens, or inappropriate routing."},"credible_problem_signal":{"status":"YES","reason":"Primary research provides credible, though indirect and weak, evidence of interdisciplinary terminology, artifact-interpretation, networking, and collaborator-search barriers; the mathematics-specific prevalence and importance remain empirical uncertainties rather than an absence of signal."},"identifiable_partner_or_adopter":{"status":"YES","reason":"A collaborative mathematics project's steering group or theorem owners are a concrete authorizer class with relevant records and authority; AIM- or ICERM-like mathematics institutes are also identifiable convening or funding classes, although no willing partner is yet committed."},"partner_access_is_necessary":{"status":"YES","reason":"The decisive uncertainties require authorized access to archived proof-obligation records, confidentiality and attribution context, paired specialists, reviewers, and a local adoption decision; ordinary public research cannot establish archive suitability, comparative performance, or adopter pull."},"safe_authorized_first_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposed first step is a shadow replay of resolved cases with concealed resolutions, no effect on live theorem status, retained owner authority, confidentiality controls, workload caps, independent review, stop conditions, and rollback. It proceeds only after record-owner permission and any required local ethics determination."},"bounded_decisive_empirical_design":{"status":"YES","reason":"The eight-case clinic-versus-ad-hoc replay fixes access and session limits, includes blinded fidelity review and an incompatible case, rotates specialists, measures labor, time, defects, reopens, escalation, and downstream burden, and states practical-effect and safety falsifiers."},"no_material_negative_gate":{"status":"YES","reason":"No verified pipeline gate is materially NO: the incremental claim, bounded evidence step, safety and authority posture, and cost scope are YES, while problem support and adopter support are explicitly UNCERTAIN and are directly addressable through the proposed partnership."},"not_merely_more_research":{"status":"YES","reason":"The next step names the partner assets, authorization, eight-case corpus, experimental arms, access controls, metrics, thresholds, stop rules, and post-test adoption decision required; it is an executable partnered test rather than an instruction to continue general research."}},"uncertainty_types":["PROBLEM_PREVALENCE","ADOPTER_PULL","INCREMENTAL_EFFECT","WORKFLOW_FIT","DATA_ACCESS"],"partner_profile":"A collaborative mathematics project spanning a recurring pair of subfields, governed by a steering group or theorem owners who control a suitable archive and can recruit compensated specialists and independent reviewers; an AIM- or ICERM-like institute could serve as host or funder.","required_access":"Written owner authorization; eight de-identified, fully resolved cross-subfield proof-obligation records with lawful and ethical reuse permission; original context and archived resolutions under controlled concealment; paired cross-subfield specialists; a separate ad hoc comparator team; blinded reviewers; secure record handling; and authority to obtain a post-test adoption decision.","bounded_empirical_test":"Pre-register and run an eight-case shadow replay comparing a capped rotating two-specialist clinic with a separate equal-access ad hoc-handoff team. Conceal resolutions until packets are frozen, rotate clinic specialists after two cases, include successful translations, substantive-mathematics cases, and one incompatible case, and have blinded reviewers score fidelity, preserved definitions, hypotheses and quantifiers, uncertainty, routing, readiness, labor, elapsed time, reopens, escalation, and downstream burden.","success_condition":"With no confidentiality breach or material undisclosed statement alteration, the clinic correctly rejects the incompatible case, keeps defects, reopens, inappropriate routing, and downstream burden no worse than the comparator, and achieves the precommitted 25% improvement in median total preparation labor or elapsed time, or another precommitted practically meaningful gain.","falsification_condition":"Falsify the intervention for the tested scope if either arm breaches confidentiality, the clinic introduces a material undisclosed statement alteration, fails to reject the incompatible case, sends more than half of nominally eligible cases to substantive escalation, achieves no precommitted practically meaningful labor or time improvement, or increases defects, reopens, inappropriate routing, or downstream burden.","rationale":"This is a narrow empirical-partner candidate because adjacent prior art leaves a differentiated governed-combination claim, external evidence supplies a credible but indirect problem signal, and every decisive remaining question depends on proprietary project records, human workflow, and adopter authority. The archival shadow replay is safe, comparator-based, bounded, and capable of rejecting the claim; passing it would justify a larger trial, not live or mandatory deployment."}