{"schema_version":1,"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_external_evaluation_20260803","source_assessment_id":"ritualized_meaning_and_commitment_enactment__environmental_climate:P2:v0","cell_id":"ritualized_meaning_and_commitment_enactment__environmental_climate","search_queries":["site:esgf.github.io CMIP6 dataset deprecated withdrawn errata data citation","site:ipcc-data.org obsolete climate scenarios guidance new use reproducibility archive","climate projection data lifecycle retirement deprecation archive provenance users migration","scientific software deprecation legacy users identity retirement ceremony ritual","climate services users legacy climate projections migration updated datasets barriers study","CMIP6 data retraction errata withdrawn dataset version provenance official","climate projection governance obsolete scenarios update users archive reproducibility official","retirement ceremony obsolete software project sunset ritual organization","\"retirement ceremony\" software system decommissioning","\"sunset ceremony\" software project retirement","ritual organizational change technology retirement ceremony study","climate data package deprecation user notification retirement plan official","site:metoffice.gov.uk UKCP user consultation projections user needs update climate projections","site:gov.uk climate projections user needs update UKCP legacy scenarios","\"Identifying user requirements to inform national climate projections in the UK\" DOI","site:ssrn.com/abstract=2994394 Ritual Design Crafting Team Rituals"],"sources":[{"source_id":"S1","title":"PO.DAAC Data Management Best Practices","publisher":"NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center","url":"https://podaac.jpl.nasa.gov/PO.DAAC_DataManagementPractices","source_class":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","publication_date":"n.d.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["An operational Earth-science archive uses a formal dataset lifecycle covering acceptance, distribution, replacement, and retirement.","The lifecycle requires defined deliverables, including a retirement plan, before a phase is complete.","NASA PO.DAAC is an identifiable potential adopter or analogue with dataset-custody authority."]},{"source_id":"S2","title":"SWE-196: Software Retirement Archival","publisher":"NASA Software Engineering Handbook","url":"https://swehb.nasa.gov/spaces/SWEHBVD/pages/102695531/SWE-196%2B-%2BSoftware%2BRetirement%2BArchival","source_class":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","publication_date":"n.d.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["NASA guidance treats retirement as a structured process requiring documented tasks, roles, coordination, archival locations, cessation, inventory updates, notices, verification, and audits.","The guidance calls for explicit distinctions among archive, retirement, disposal, and possible reuse.","Most operational outputs proposed for the assembly already have close non-ritual counterparts in established retirement practice."]},{"source_id":"S3","title":"CMIP6 Guidance for Data Users","publisher":"Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory","url":"https://pcmdi.llnl.gov/CMIP6/Guide/dataUsers.html","source_class":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","publication_date":"2022","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["CMIP6 already maintains an errata service for modifications and corrections.","Users can retrace dataset and file version histories, and affected datasets can be linked through persistent identifiers.","CMIP has identifiable technical governance and data-manager roles that could authorize catalog controls but not necessarily a ritual intervention."]},{"source_id":"S4","title":"Data Notice: NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis 1 Updates to End","publisher":"NOAA Physical Sciences Laboratory","url":"https://psl.noaa.gov/news/2026/r1datanotice.html","source_class":"GOVERNMENT_OR_REGULATOR","publication_date":"2026-03-11","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["A real climate-data transition ended updates to a longstanding reanalysis while preserving historical access.","At announcement time, NOAA was still identifying downstream products that would cease updating or require an alternative.","This visibly demonstrates dependency-discovery and historical-access issues during climate-product retirement."]},{"source_id":"S5","title":"The Problem of Zombie Datasets: A Framework for Deprecating Datasets","publisher":"arXiv","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.04424","source_class":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","publication_date":"2021-11-08","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["The authors identified datasets that continued circulating after deprecation and described associated technical, legal, ethical, and organizational problems.","They found no standardized dataset-deprecation approach in the examined field.","Their framework covers risk, impact mitigation, appeal, timelines, post-deprecation protocols, publication checks, centralized archiving, and modification tracking."]},{"source_id":"S6","title":"Detachment and Attachment: A Dual-Pathway Model of Leader Succession Rituals","publisher":"SAGE Publications, Journal of Management","url":"https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/01492063261419057","source_class":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","publication_date":"2026","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["Qualitative, field, and experimental studies identified closure, farewell, handover, endorsement, and artifact-transfer rituals in organizational succession.","The reported effects operated through detachment from a former leader and attachment to a successor.","This supports an adjacent transition mechanism but does not test retirement of scientific datasets or projection packages."]},{"source_id":"S7","title":"UK Climate Projections News and Updates","publisher":"UK Met Office and UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://ukclimateprojections-ui.metoffice.gov.uk/news","source_class":"OFFICIAL_ORGANIZATION_DATA","publication_date":"2026-06-19","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["The government-funded UK Climate Information program states a need to improve on UKCP18 in response to scientific change and new requirements from an increasingly diverse user community.","The program expressly seeks user involvement and discusses barriers to applying and interpreting changing climate information.","Past UKCP corrections distinguished affected variables and applications, recommended updated data for new applications, retained qualified historical-use guidance, and responded to user feedback."]},{"source_id":"S8","title":"Cloud.gov Deprecation Policy","publisher":"Cloud.gov, U.S. General Services Administration","url":"https://docs.cloud.gov/platform/compliance/deprecation-policy/","source_class":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","publication_date":"n.d.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claims_supported":["A federal platform uses a predictable, transparent deprecation sequence with a replacement available first.","Its baseline includes announcement, blocking new instances, repeated reminders, migration responsibility, justified exceptions, and eventual shutdown.","This is a strong non-ritual comparator for communication and workflow enforcement."]}],"problem_evidence":{"support":"STRONG","rationale":"The general retirement problem visibly exists: NOAA preserved historical data while still discovering affected downstream products; CMIP operates version-history and errata infrastructure; UKCP has issued application-specific warnings and replacement guidance; and primary research documents continued circulation of deprecated datasets. Evidence does not establish how often technically retired regional projection packages remain socially legitimate specifically because of creator identity or shared memory.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S5","S7"]},"stakeholder_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"NASA PO.DAAC, LLNL/CMIP governance, NOAA, and the Met Office are identifiable custodians or authorizers. Their sources express needs for lifecycle governance, user communication, dependency identification, migration, preservation, and engagement. No source expresses demand for a ceremonial assembly, witnessed testimony, silence interval, or symbolic closure; that demand remains hypothetical.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S4","S7"]},"prior_art":{"proximity":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","closest_analogues":[{"name":"NASA PO.DAAC dataset lifecycle and retirement plan","similarity":"Formal Earth-science dataset retirement/replacement process with required deliverables and a responsible archive.","remaining_difference":"No collectively enacted symbolic ending, plural lineage account, witnessed recognition, or voluntary obligation-transfer ceremony is specified.","source_ids":["S1"]},{"name":"NASA software retirement and archival procedure","similarity":"Covers reasons, authority, stakeholders, roles, records, archival access, cessation, notices, audits, and objective evidence.","remaining_difference":"It treats retirement as procedural governance, not as an identity- and meaning-focused social performance.","source_ids":["S2"]},{"name":"CMIP6 errata and version-history infrastructure","similarity":"Preserves provenance, documents corrections, links affected datasets, and supports reconstruction of version history.","remaining_difference":"It manages technical correction and traceability without a shared retirement occasion or measured social-legitimacy intervention.","source_ids":["S3"]},{"name":"Cloud.gov staged deprecation policy","similarity":"Provides replacement-first deprecation, notification, migration time, new-use blocking, reminders, exceptions, and shutdown.","remaining_difference":"It does not preserve plural scientific memory or test whether ritualized closure adds value beyond transparent controls.","source_ids":["S8"]},{"name":"Organizational succession rituals","similarity":"Uses handover, closure, farewell, endorsement, and symbolic transfer to support detachment from a predecessor and attachment to a successor.","remaining_difference":"The studied object is leadership succession, not retirement of a scientific artifact; it does not address reproducibility, dataset lineage, or catalog authority.","source_ids":["S6"]}],"distinctive_claim_remaining":"For a projection package whose technical retirement is already authorized but remains socially ambiguous, adding a voluntary, consent-reviewed sunset assembly to the normal retirement packet and workflow controls will improve correct identification of the retirement reason, historical-use boundary, successor limitations, archive location, exception route, and obligation owners by at least 15 percentage points and surface at least one additional actionable dependency or unsupported obligation per retirement, without increasing reported participation pressure by more than 5 percentage points. This claim is untested.","confidence":"MODERATE"},"implementation_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"The catalog, archive, versioning, notice, role-assignment, and audit components are established and technically feasible. A 60-minute meeting, anonymous input, remote access, and pre/post instruments require little new technology. Governance is feasible only if an existing board retains technical authority and catalog changes occur through ordinary controlled procedures. Legal and workflow gaps include adopter-specific records-retention, privacy, accessibility, labor/workload, attribution, licensing, export-control, and nonretaliation review. The key safety uncertainty is whether voluntary participation is genuinely costless under professional hierarchy; no direct evidence tests the proposed assembly in climate-data governance.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S6","S7","S8"]},"scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":3,"rationale":"On a 1–5 scale, clearer use boundaries and dependency ownership could prevent inappropriate new decisions while preserving reproducibility, but operational controls already deliver most direct risk reduction and prevalence is unknown.","source_ids":["S2","S4","S5","S7"]},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":2,"rationale":"Authorizers visibly want better transition governance, communication, and user engagement, but no adopter has requested the ritual layer.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S7"]},"incremental_advantage":{"score":2,"rationale":"Archives, notices, migration guidance, ownership, redirects, appeals, and workflow blocks are established comparators. The proposed advantage is limited to social interpretation, dependency elicitation, and legitimate closure and has not been demonstrated.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S5","S8"]},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"The bounded search found artifact-retirement procedures and organizational transition rituals separately, but no direct climate-projection sunset assembly. Absence from eight sources does not measure world novelty.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S6","S8"]},"technical_implementability":{"score":4,"rationale":"The intervention mainly composes meetings, records, catalog versioning, archival preservation, redirects, notifications, and surveys from established capabilities.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S8"]},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":3,"rationale":"Credible boards and custodians exist, and the proposal appropriately reserves technical decisions for them; however, no organization has accepted the ceremony, facilitator authority, consent reviewer, or halt rule.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S7"]},"evidence_readiness":{"score":2,"rationale":"Problem and baseline-practice evidence are available, but there is no direct measure of social ambiguity, adopter demand for ritual, or incremental effect in scientific-package retirement.","source_ids":["S4","S5","S6","S7"]},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":3,"rationale":"Preserving a read-only copy, separating historical from new use, retaining ordinary authority, and permitting opt-out and halt paths are useful safeguards. The event could nevertheless stigmatize creators or sanctify a predetermined decision.","source_ids":["S2","S3","S6","S7"]},"scalability":{"score":3,"rationale":"A reusable script and existing catalog infrastructure permit replication, but accessibility review, provenance preparation, distributed-user outreach, facilitation, and follow-up create case-specific burdens.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S7","S8"]}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Design and run one randomized fictional-package evaluation with 24–40 authors, custodians, reviewers, and users; prepare matched technical records, consent review, anonymous instruments, facilitation, and analysis.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Approximately 100–250 total staff and participant hours valued at $100–$175 per hour resource-equivalent.","Remote delivery uses existing meeting and survey systems.","No catalog production changes or participant travel are included."],"source_ids":["S2","S6","S8"]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Create governance-approved templates, accessibility and privacy controls, facilitator training, archive/catalog integration procedures, rollback checks, and notification mappings for one regional program.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Existing catalog, archive, identity, and notification infrastructure can be reused.","No new software platform is built.","Legal, records, accessibility, and labor review require 100–300 specialist hours."],"source_ids":["S1","S2","S3"]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"10K_TO_50K","scope":"Prepare and conduct one live assembly for an already-authorized, noncritical package, including lineage verification, dependency outreach, facilitation, catalog execution, debrief, and short evaluation.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["One package has a completed technical decision and reproducibility plan.","Approximately 120–300 staff and participant hours are required.","Migration compute and downstream reanalysis costs are excluded and budgeted through normal program governance."],"source_ids":["S2","S4","S7"]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"Operate, document, and audit approximately 4–8 package assemblies per year for one regional program, including accessibility, absent-user outreach, debriefs, dependency tracking, and an annual harm/drift review.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Each case consumes 60–160 combined staff and participant hours.","Existing archival and catalog services remain funded separately.","The band excludes substantive migration engineering, recomputation, storage expansion, and replacement-package development."],"source_ids":["S1","S2","S8"]}},"verified_pipeline_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"YES","reason":"Actual climate products are corrected, withdrawn, superseded, or stopped while historical access and downstream dependencies must still be managed; deprecated datasets can continue circulating.","source_ids":["S3","S4","S5","S7"]},"externally_credible_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"NASA PO.DAAC, CMIP/LLNL governance, NOAA, and the Met Office are credible custodians or authorizers and express relevant transition and user-engagement needs, although none endorses the ritual layer.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S7"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The residual claim is explicitly measurable against documentation, notices, migration assignments, archives, and workflow controls using comprehension, dependency-discovery, follow-through, and pressure outcomes.","source_ids":["S2","S5","S6","S8"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A fictional-package randomized comparison can be completed without changing scientific status and has defined sample, duration, outcomes, comparator, and falsifiers.","source_ids":["S2","S6","S8"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The proposed separation of technical authority from voluntary participation is sensible, but no adopter has verified nonretaliation, privacy, attribution, cultural-standing, accessibility, workload, or halt/rollback rules under actual professional power asymmetries.","source_ids":["S2","S6","S7"]},"credible_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"The scope is bounded and existing-process requirements are documented, but no source reports costs for a comparable scientific-artifact retirement assembly; ranges are staff-time estimates rather than externally validated budgets.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S8"]}},"next_evidence_step":"Recruit 24–40 relevant professionals from one willing climate-scenario program for a single fictional-package study. Randomly assign them to (A) the program’s normal retirement packet—technical decision, archive link, successor guidance, owners, notices, and workflow boundary—or (B) the identical packet plus the proposed 60-minute consent-reviewed assembly. Measure the six-item retirement-boundary score before, immediately after, and seven days later; independently blind-code newly identified dependencies, provenance corrections, and unsupported obligations; and anonymously measure pressure, humiliation, authority confusion, accessibility failure, and time burden. Falsify the incremental claim if arm B improves correct boundary identification by less than 15 percentage points, produces no net actionable dependency or correction, leaves operational ownership incomplete, increases reported pressure by more than 5 percentage points, or yields any credible retaliation, humiliation, privacy breach, false provenance, or confusion about who authorizes retirement. Only a passing fictional test should advance to one already-authorized noncritical live package.","blocking_evidence":["No measured prevalence of technically deprecated climate-projection packages that remain socially ambiguous because of professional identity, shared memory, or founder-controlled knowledge.","No climate-data custodian has expressed demand for a ritualized sunset assembly.","No direct evidence shows incremental benefit over versioned notices, archives, redirects, migration workshops, owner assignment, appeals, and workflow blocks.","No field evidence verifies genuinely costless refusal, nonretaliation, privacy, accessibility, and emotional safety under scientific workplace hierarchies.","No adopter-specific legal or policy review covers records retention, attribution, licensing, export controls, employment/workload authority, accessibility, or anonymous feedback.","No externally validated staffing, facilitation, compliance, or recurring-operation budget is available."],"research_disposition":"PARTNERED_RESEARCH_PROGRAM","world_novelty_boundary":"This evaluation measured neither world novelty nor patentability, freedom to operate, market size, or realized impact. The bounded search found established dataset/software retirement governance and adjacent organizational succession rituals, but did not establish whether their combination has appeared elsewhere in research, practice, patents, internal programs, or unpublished climate-service workflows.","arm":"COMPLETE_PROPOSAL_PORTFOLIO","candidate_version":0,"controller_recommendation":{"action":"STOP_EMPIRICAL_RESEARCH_NEEDED","repairable":false,"material_progress_observed":true,"progress_targets":["Obtain a named climate-scenario program willing to authorize the fictional randomized comparison and identify the baseline retirement workflow.","Demonstrate at least a 15-percentage-point comprehension advantage over the complete non-ritual baseline and at least one net actionable dependency or provenance correction.","Show noninferiority on participation pressure within a 5-percentage-point margin and zero credible retaliation, humiliation, privacy breach, or authority confusion.","Secure adopter-specific approval for decision authority, consent review, accessibility, privacy, attribution, records retention, workload assignment, halt, and rollback.","Validate startup, per-case, and annual resource-equivalent costs using recorded staff time from the fictional study and one independently authorized live pilot."],"reason":"Web evidence verifies the retirement problem, credible custodians, strong operational comparators, and an adjacent ritual mechanism, but it cannot determine whether the proposed ceremony adds benefit or causes identity and coercion harms in climate-data governance. Those decisive facts require proprietary workflow access, participant research, and controlled live testing. Under the required controller rule, this empirical-research stop is not repairable within bounded web research."},"proposal_index":2}