{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_four_proposal_generalization60_20260803","source_assessment_id":"ritualized_meaning_and_commitment_enactment__accounting_auditing:P2:v0","cell_id":"ritualized_meaning_and_commitment_enactment__accounting_auditing","proposal_index":2,"qualification":"EMPIRICAL_PARTNER_CANDIDATE","criteria":{"specific_differentiated_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposal isolates a falsifiable incremental claim: with facts, time, documentation, and facilitation held constant, governed symbolic reenactment plus reciprocal renewal should outperform a nonritual walkthrough and ordinary training on seven-day provenance recall, responsibility mapping, and workflow-ready follow-through without added harm."},"credible_problem_signal":{"status":"YES","reason":"Regulatory, professional, framework, and practitioner evidence supports consequential control deficiencies, turnover-related knowledge loss, and mechanical performance of prescribed procedures, although the narrower symptom's prevalence remains to be measured."},"identifiable_partner_or_adopter":{"status":"YES","reason":"A corporate controller or internal-control leader is a concrete authorizer and adopter class; HR, privacy, accessibility, employee-relations, and internal-audit personnel can provide the required review and oversight."},"partner_access_is_necessary":{"status":"YES","reason":"The unresolved incremental effect, workflow fit, adopter pull, narrow-problem prevalence, labor burden, and coercion or accommodation performance under an employment hierarchy require access to organizational participants and governance reviewers and cannot be resolved through public research."},"safe_authorized_first_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposed first step uses volunteers, a wholly synthetic failure, invented roles, nonproduction documents, no live-control changes, explicit accommodations and opt-outs, anonymous harm feedback, authority separation, and defined halt and rollback rules, subject to sponsor and organizational approvals."},"bounded_decisive_empirical_design":{"status":"YES","reason":"A preregistered three-arm test with 36 to 60 participants, blinded immediate and seven-day scoring, an uninvolved workflow-readiness review, prespecified incremental-effect and harm thresholds, and recorded labor hours is bounded, comparator-based, reversible, and capable of rejecting the intervention."},"no_material_negative_gate":{"status":"YES","reason":"All substantive pipeline gates are YES. Cost scope is uncertain rather than materially negative and can be measured within the same trial; there is no unresolved safety or authority stop for the synthetic test."},"not_merely_more_research":{"status":"YES","reason":"The next action is a specified organizational experiment with defined participants, comparators, measures, approval conditions, success thresholds, falsifiers, and stop rules rather than an open-ended request for additional research."}},"uncertainty_types":["PROBLEM_PREVALENCE","ADOPTER_PULL","INCREMENTAL_EFFECT","WORKFLOW_FIT","DATA_ACCESS","COST_SCOPE"],"partner_profile":"A reporting organization with a corporate controller or internal-control leader willing to sponsor a synthetic test, access to 36 to 60 volunteer accounting, source-data, and control personnel across tenure levels, and HR, privacy, accessibility, employee-relations, and control-governance reviewers.","required_access":"Authorization to recruit and stratify organizational volunteers, deliver three synthetic content- and time-equivalent sessions, collect anonymous immediate and seven-day outcomes and safety reports, obtain blind review from an uninvolved control specialist, and record activity-based labor hours; no production transactions, live control evidence, confidential incidents, or authority to alter controls is required.","bounded_empirical_test":"Preregister and run three synthetic arms: the complete Control-Memory and Repair Cycle; a facilitated incident walkthrough using identical facts, dependency maps, discussion, and action forms but no ritual mechanisms; and ordinary case-based control training using the same materials. Blind-score immediate and seven-day knowledge and responsibility outcomes, independently rate workflow readiness, test harm and accommodation thresholds, and measure preparation and delivery labor.","success_condition":"The complete-cycle arm exceeds the best simpler comparator by at least 10 percentage points on the seven-day retention-and-responsibility composite, improves workflow readiness, preserves accurate distinctions between learning artifacts and control evidence, produces no identifiable supervisor-facing opt-outs or failed accommodations, keeps blame or participation-pressure reports at or below 10%, and yields a supportable activity-based cost estimate.","falsification_condition":"Reject or materially redesign the intervention if it fails the 10-point incremental-effect threshold, does not improve workflow readiness, causes confusion about control evidence or remediation, makes opt-outs visible to supervisors, produces any failed religious or accessibility accommodation, exceeds the blame or pressure threshold, or cannot be delivered at a burden justified by its measured advantage.","rationale":"This is an appropriate empirical-partner candidate because adjacent prior art leaves a narrow, differentiated mechanism claim intact, credible evidence supports the underlying control-memory problem and identifiable authorizers, and the remaining decisive questions require controlled participation inside an organization. The proposed synthetic three-arm test can resolve those questions safely and decisively while also measuring partner-specific workflow and cost conditions."}