{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_four_proposal_generalization60_20260803","cell_id":"representation_independent_interface_contract__sociology_anthropology","arm":"COMPLETE_PROPOSAL_PORTFOLIO","candidate_id":"opaque_probability_sampling_frame_contract","proposal_index":4,"version":0,"title":"Opaque Probability-Sampling Frame Contract for Multi-Wave Social Research","problem":"A multi-wave household study maintains recruitment frames in changing forms across field offices, including address spreadsheets, household rosters, relational databases, and locally assigned identifiers. Sampling scripts and recruitment staff may depend on row order, blank-value conventions, duplicate-record handling, or identifier structure. Migrating or reordering the same intended frame can then change which units are treated as eligible, how often a unit appears, which units a seeded draw selects, or which inclusion probability is assigned, even though no sampling-design change was authorized.","actors":["Potential research participants","Field-office frame custodians","Sampling statisticians","Recruitment coordinators","Research data engineers","Study ethics and data-governance representatives","Community advisory representatives where applicable"],"observable_state":"For each frozen frame and draw, authorized clients can observe opaque sampling-unit handles, eligibility status under a named rule, stratum or cluster membership needed by the approved design, selected status, inclusion probability, draw identifier, and validation result. Representation coupling is observable when equivalent frames encoded or ordered differently yield different abstract units, selections, or weights under the same design and seed; when a duplicate physical record creates an extra sampling chance; or when sampling code must inspect names, addresses, row numbers, or database-specific keys.","consequence":"An implementation or storage change can silently modify the operational target population or selection behavior, making recruitment differences look like field outcomes rather than unrecorded design changes. Duplicate inclusion, exclusion of unresolved units, changed weights, and exposure of direct identifiers can also occur without a clear boundary between substantive sampling decisions and technical representation choices.","affected_objective":"Preserve authorized eligibility, unit uniqueness, seeded selection behavior, inclusion probabilities, and auditability across changes to sampling-frame storage and computation while withholding direct identifiers from ordinary sampling clients.","intervention":"Construct an opaque Probability-Sampling Frame defined by abstract units and behavioral laws. Its public operations are resolve_unit_status, freeze_snapshot, draw_sample, query_inclusion_probability, verify_draw, supersede_snapshot, and export_recruitment_handles. A frozen snapshot contains one abstract occurrence of each resolved sampling unit, an explicit eligibility state, approved design attributes, and version references for eligibility, identity resolution, and sampling design. Direct identifiers and source records remain behind the frame-custodian boundary. Preconditions, postconditions, errors, and side-effect limits are stated for every operation. Contract laws require that a frozen snapshot is immutable; unknown, unresolved, ineligible, and withdrawn remain distinct; one abstract unit cannot gain multiple selection chances from duplicate physical records; the same snapshot, design version, and seed produce the same selected handles and inclusion probabilities; storage permutation and lossless reserialization do not change a draw; every selected unit belongs to the design's eligible domain; an invalid draw request returns an error without a partial sample; verification and probability queries do not mutate state; and drawing alone never initiates participant contact. Each backend supplies a representation invariant and mapping from its valid records to abstract units. A shared black-box and metamorphic conformance suite gates replacement of the backend. Eligibility rules, identity-resolution policy, and sampling design remain substantive, versioned decisions rather than hidden implementation changes.","structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"Abstract component","domain_realization":"A frozen probability-sampling frame consisting of unique abstract sampling units and the authorized behavior for drawing from them."},{"archetype_element":"Observable operation surface","domain_realization":"Resolve status, freeze a snapshot, draw with a named design and seed, query probabilities, verify results, supersede a snapshot, and export opaque recruitment handles."},{"archetype_element":"Abstract state model","domain_realization":"Mutable frame preparation followed by an immutable snapshot, versioned draws, verification results, and explicit eligible, ineligible, unresolved, unknown, or withdrawn unit states."},{"archetype_element":"Behavioral laws and invariants","domain_realization":"Each resolved abstract unit occurs once, frozen snapshots do not mutate, seeded draws are representation-independent, selected units satisfy the design, and errors produce no partial draw."},{"archetype_element":"Hidden representation","domain_realization":"Names, addresses, source rows, household-file layout, internal database keys, deduplication indexes, caches, and physical enumeration order remain private."},{"archetype_element":"Abstraction function","domain_realization":"A custodian-approved mapping converts each valid backend state into unique abstract units, explicit statuses, and approved design attributes."},{"archetype_element":"Conformance oracle","domain_realization":"Synthetic equivalent frames, representation transformations, draw sequences, and invariant checks are applied to every candidate backend through public operations only."},{"archetype_element":"Substitutability rule","domain_realization":"A backend may replace another for the same approved frame contract only if it preserves snapshots, seeded draws, inclusion probabilities, errors, and side-effect limits."},{"archetype_element":"Leakage control","domain_realization":"Audits check whether handles, output ordering, error messages, timing, or metadata reveal direct identifiers, source ordering, or internal frame structure."},{"archetype_element":"Versioned stewardship","domain_realization":"Changes to target-population eligibility, identity resolution, stratification, clustering, or selection rules receive new substantive versions; storage and optimization changes remain private when conformance is preserved."}],"mechanism_mapping":[{"mechanism_slug":"abstract_data_type_specification","role":"Defines the frame as unique abstract units and sampling operations, then binds every concrete backend to that meaning with a representation invariant and abstraction function.","counterfactual_removal":"Without this model, a canonical table would merely replace one storage format with another, leaving unit identity and eligibility dependent on fields and rows."},{"mechanism_slug":"design_by_contract_clause","role":"Specifies obligations and guarantees for freezing, drawing, verifying, superseding, and handling invalid designs, unresolved units, or oversized sample requests.","counterfactual_removal":"Without operation-level clauses, implementations could disagree about partial draws, unresolved eligibility, repeated seeds, or failed verification while sharing signatures."},{"mechanism_slug":"opaque_type_or_module_boundary","role":"Exposes stable sampling handles and authorized design attributes while preventing ordinary clients from inspecting names, addresses, source records, or internal keys.","counterfactual_removal":"Without opacity, sampling and recruitment code could continue joining on direct identifiers or relying on row and key structure."},{"mechanism_slug":"black_box_contract_test_suite","role":"Runs the same synthetic snapshots and draw requests against all backends and accepts replacements based on contract-visible outcomes.","counterfactual_removal":"Without a reusable oracle, migration checks would remain implementation-specific spot comparisons that may overlook changed eligibility, multiplicity, or error behavior."},{"mechanism_slug":"metamorphic_behavior_test","role":"Checks required relations such as row permutation, lossless reserialization, or replacement of duplicate physical records by one abstract unit leaving the specified draw behavior unchanged.","counterfactual_removal":"Without representation transformations, a backend could pass fixed examples while still allowing storage order or encoding to affect selection."},{"mechanism_slug":"property_based_conformance_test","role":"Generates frame states, duplicate records, strata, clusters, seeds, sample sizes, and operation sequences to test invariants across a wider input space.","counterfactual_removal":"Without generated cases, tests may omit combinations that create duplicate selection chances, invalid weights, or partial results after errors."},{"mechanism_slug":"representation_leakage_probe","role":"Examines handles, ordering, error wording, metadata, and coarse timing for unpromised disclosure of identities or backend structure.","counterfactual_removal":"Without the probe, an opaque API could still reveal address ordering, source-row identifiers, or other details that clients could depend on or use for reidentification."},{"mechanism_slug":"semantic_versioning_and_deprecation_gate","role":"Distinguishes private implementation changes from substantive changes to eligibility, identity resolution, or sampling design and requires explicit migration for the latter.","counterfactual_removal":"Without the gate, a technical release could silently alter the target population or inclusion probabilities while retaining the same nominal interface."}],"causal_chain":["Sampling clients depend on abstract snapshots and draw operations rather than source tables, row order, or direct identifiers.","The representation invariant and abstraction function require every valid backend to denote the same unique sampling units and explicit eligibility states.","Snapshot immutability separates later frame maintenance from an already authorized draw population.","Seeded-draw laws and explicit design versions make selection behavior and inclusion probabilities part of the observable contract.","Black-box, property-based, and metamorphic tests reject backends whose results change under representation-only transformations.","Opacity and leakage audits prevent clients from reconstructing or depending on identities and storage conventions.","Version governance distinguishes an authorized substantive redesign from a private backend replacement.","A conforming backend can therefore be replaced without silently changing the sampling behavior exposed to recruitment and analysis workflows."],"baseline":"Field offices export current spreadsheets or database tables to sampling staff, who deduplicate, filter, sort, and draw using scripts coupled to those files. Frozen copies may preserve one draw but make later migration difficult. Validation commonly compares row counts or selected records rather than testing abstract unit identity, state distinctions, operation sequences, and behavior under representation transformations.","nearest_rivals":["Require every field office to use one centrally managed sampling-frame schema and database.","Freeze the original raw file for each wave and prohibit re-representation after the draw.","Have a sampling statistician manually reconcile, deduplicate, and certify every frame and migration.","Allow backend-specific draws and address differences afterward through revised weights or analytic adjustment."],"remaining_contrastive_claim":"Unlike a mandatory central database, the intervention standardizes abstract frame behavior without fixing physical storage. Unlike preserving raw files indefinitely, it permits backend replacement under an explicit oracle. Unlike manual certification, it makes invariants and representation transformations repeatable. Unlike post-draw adjustment, it identifies unrecorded changes before recruitment treats them as an authorized sample. The claim is conditional and structural: when unit identity, eligibility, and design semantics are explicitly governed, conforming implementations can substitute without sampling clients depending on their representation.","authority_safety":{"decision_authority":"The authorized sampling statistician and study governance body decide the target population, eligibility rule, identity-resolution policy, design attributes, selection procedure, and seed-disclosure policy, with community or field-partner review where those choices encode locally consequential categories. Frame custodians resolve source records under those approved rules. Software maintainers may verify technical conformance but may not decide eligibility, merge people or households, change the sampling design, or initiate contact.","authorized_first_step":"The authorized study team may conduct a synthetic dual-backend exercise using fictional sampling units and invented design attributes. It may draft and test the contract without importing live frame records, selecting real participants, or initiating recruitment.","excluded_actions":["Treating technical inclusion in a draw as participant consent","Contacting any selected unit during the first evidence step","Automatically merging people, households, or addresses without the approved identity-resolution process","Inferring eligibility or sensitive attributes from unapproved proxies","Exposing names, addresses, contact information, or reversible source identifiers through public handles","Reclassifying unresolved units as ineligible merely to make the frame complete","Changing eligibility, stratification, clustering, or selection rules as an implementation patch","Migrating or replacing a live sampling backend without substantive and technical approval","Using conformance results as evidence that the source frame adequately covers the intended population"],"halt_rollback":"Stop if authorized reviewers find that the abstract unit model collapses a locally meaningful distinction, resolves identity without sufficient authority, exposes identifying information, or embeds an unapproved sampling decision. Discard the synthetic mappings and prototypes, leave live frames and recruitment procedures unchanged, and return disputed rules to sampling and study governance. A later pilot must retain the certified prior draw path for immediate rollback."},"negative_tests":{"strongest_counterevidence":"The strongest counterevidence would show that observed sample differences arise from intentional design revisions, changing source-population coverage, or unresolved substantive identity judgments while representation-only changes already preserve units, eligibility, draws, and probabilities. In that case, the proposed contract addresses neither the principal source of variation nor the needed governance decision.","problem_falsifier":"For the examined workflow, the representation-coupling problem is falsified if materially different encodings of the same approved frame consistently yield identical abstract snapshots, seeded selections, inclusion probabilities, and errors without sampling clients inspecting source-specific fields or applying undocumented corrections.","intervention_falsifier":"The intervention is falsified if independently implemented backends pass the stated oracle yet differ on held-out contract-level draws or probabilities; if valid source states cannot map to unique abstract units without concealing unresolved judgment; or if ordinary sampling operations still require direct access to hidden identifiers or storage order.","risks":["The abstract unit model may falsely stabilize contested definitions of household, address, or membership.","Deduplication can collapse distinct eligible units, while failure to deduplicate can create unequal selection chances.","Deterministic seeded draws or poorly designed handles may facilitate reidentification or prediction of selection.","A conforming frame can still omit parts of the intended population because interface conformance does not establish coverage.","Versioned eligibility categories may reify socially consequential classifications.","Property and metamorphic tests establish selected laws, not the overall statistical validity of a design.","Snapshot immutability may exclude legitimate late corrections unless supersession procedures are usable.","The contract and conformance suite may add technical and governance burdens for field offices."]},"next_evidence_step":"Run one two-week synthetic exercise with a sampling statistician, a frame custodian, a data engineer, and an authorized ethics or community-governance representative. Define 200 fictional units containing invented duplicate records, household changes, unresolved identities, withdrawals, strata, clusters, and certainty units. Encode the same intended abstract frame independently as a shuffled flat file and a normalized relational store. Before implementation, specify state distinctions, mapping rules, draw behavior, error semantics, protected observables, and stop conditions. Apply fixed black-box cases plus generated seeds and metamorphic transformations including row permutation, lossless reserialization, internal-key replacement, insertion of ineligible records, and duplicate-record consolidation. Compare snapshots, selected opaque handles, probabilities, errors, and side effects; inject deliberately broken adapters to check whether the suite detects order dependence, duplicate chances, and partial draws. Record every divergence, unmappable state, hidden-data dependency, and leakage channel. Use no real identifiers and initiate no recruitment.","prior_art_status":"UNSEARCHED","diversity_from_prior_proposals":"Proposal 1 governs normative permission to use archived ethnographic materials; its abstract object is a community authorization and its causal path preserves community control while hiding deliberative representation. Proposal 2 governs epistemic continuity in a kin-relation corpus; its abstract object is an attributed relation claim collection and its causal path preserves provenance, contradiction, supersession, and derivation semantics across storage backends. Proposal 3 governs operational coordination among autonomous mutual-aid groups; its abstract object is a voluntary service commitment and its causal path preserves authority-scoped task transitions across private organizing tools. This proposal governs methodological integrity in social-research recruitment; its abstract object is a frozen probability-sampling frame and its causal path preserves unit uniqueness, eligibility, seeded selection, and inclusion probabilities under representation-only transformations. It makes no archive-access decision, represents no kinship claims, and coordinates no aid delivery. A study can adopt it independently without any of the institutions or systems required by proposals 1, 2, or 3.","revision_record":{"parent_version":null,"progress_targets_addressed":["Fourth complete proposal","Materially different problem and intervention","Distinct methodological causal chain","Explicit diversity from proposals 1, 2, and 3","Authority-bounded synthetic evidence"],"conceptual_changes":["Initial formulation of a probability-sampling frame as a representation-independent behavioral object.","Separated backend substitutability from substantive decisions about population definition, identity resolution, and sampling design."],"operational_changes":["Specified abstract units, frame states, draw operations, invariants, metamorphic relations, conformance gate, leakage controls, authority limits, rollback, and a synthetic dual-backend exercise."],"evidence_changes":["Kept prior art unsearched and restricted the first evidence step to fictional units, non-live implementations, and no participant contact."],"claim_changes":["Limited the claim to conditional preservation of contract-visible sampling behavior and made no claim of novelty, prevalence, demand, or effect size."]}}