{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C004","selector_replication":3,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":88,"causal_archetype_fit":89,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":67,"operational_specificity":78,"falsifiability_test_quality":82,"adopter_partner_path":72,"deployability_complexity":48,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":64,"empirical_partner_potential":78,"scrutiny_priority":70,"biggest_visible_risk":"The composite ranking may be too weight-sensitive and confounded by neighborhood conditions to attribute differences to district prevention practices.","rationale":"The proposal targets consequential gaming and spillovers in an existing resource rivalry, and the retrospective shadow evaluation is unusually safe and decision-relevant. However, the many contested indicators, geographic attribution rules, delayed outcomes, and actors make the operational intervention difficult to stabilize; a leaderboard may create false precision even when every component is defensible."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":86,"causal_archetype_fit":93,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":70,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":91,"deployability_complexity":82,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":86,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":91,"biggest_visible_risk":"Performance on constructed device images may not transfer to the heterogeneous and adversarial conditions of operational forensic examinations.","rationale":"The scarce procurement positions create genuine rivalry, and the intervention tightly couples selection to independently operated, held-out, reproducible performance while directly addressing portability and lock-in. A consortium can run the no-award protocol within existing procurement authority, and ranking stability, false artifacts, export usability, and operator effects can decisively determine whether to proceed. Its main prior-art vulnerability is that benchmarked procurement, portability clauses, and time-limited multi-vendor awards may resemble established purchasing practices."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":92,"causal_archetype_fit":84,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":79,"operational_specificity":90,"falsifiability_test_quality":94,"adopter_partner_path":86,"deployability_complexity":68,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":77,"empirical_partner_potential":93,"scrutiny_priority":87,"biggest_visible_risk":"Formal competition may entrench teams in assigned hypotheses and worsen information withholding or tunnel vision rather than improve discriminating inquiry.","rationale":"The resource-allocation problem is consequential, structurally credible, and addressed by specific evidence-access, preregistration, burden, and authority boundaries. The masked crossover simulation offers a strong partner-resolvable test against ordinary case conferences using later evidence and matched analyst time. Strict deployment is less secure because the rivalry itself may damage cooperative synthesis, scoring evidentiary value is judgment-laden, and any operational leakage could be consequential."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":84,"causal_archetype_fit":90,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":61,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":95,"adopter_partner_path":90,"deployability_complexity":85,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":76,"empirical_partner_potential":92,"scrutiny_priority":84,"biggest_visible_risk":"The league may largely reproduce proficiency testing while rewarding challenge-set exploitation or defect overcalling rather than transferable quality improvement.","rationale":"The proposal redirects an intelligible existing incentive from clean-looking records toward verified error discovery, with bounded packets, false-positive penalties, reproduction, and a no-stakes randomized comparison. It is highly testable and comparatively easy for an oversight consortium to pilot safely. Its contrastive claim is especially vulnerable to nearby proficiency-testing and quality-challenge practices, and success on synthetic seeded defects may not generalize to ordinary laboratory work."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_A"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_B","portfolio_observation":"B offers the strongest balance of bounded procurement authority, mechanism-essential rivalry, operational detail, and a decisive dry run. C and D are excellent empirical-partner candidates: C has the more consequential and distinctive uncertainty, while D has the cleaner experiment but greater vulnerability to standard-practice prior art. A addresses a major problem safely, yet its composite regional ranking is substantially harder to interpret and deploy.","confidence":"HIGH"}