{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C010","selector_replication":2,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":87,"causal_archetype_fit":91,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":78,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":90,"adopter_partner_path":92,"deployability_complexity":84,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":88,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":91,"biggest_visible_risk":"Common wafers and a single rubric may systematically favor particular process families rather than measure genuine shared-facility integration readiness.","rationale":"The scarce bay, unequal evidence, selective reporting, and facility spillovers form a concrete rivalry problem, and the contest architecture is causally central rather than decorative. The non-awarding archived-wafer study is unusually bounded, reversible, partner-authorizable, and capable of changing whether a prospective trial proceeds. Its main contrastive vulnerability is that common-condition trials and resource caps resemble familiar qualification practices, while cross-process comparability may fail."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":88,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":84,"operational_specificity":89,"falsifiability_test_quality":88,"adopter_partner_path":85,"deployability_complexity":70,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":87,"empirical_partner_potential":89,"scrutiny_priority":88,"biggest_visible_risk":"A candidate-independent measurand and representative reference panel may be impossible to define without suppressing legitimate differences among nanoparticle size concepts.","rationale":"Default-method designation creates consequential strategic dependence and lock-in, and independent round-robin operation directly tests transferability rather than sponsor performance. The proposal offers a meaningful integrated contrast involving interoperability, fixed-term status, and challenge. Its decisive scientific-definition problem and substantial consortium coordination burden reduce deployability, though archived interlaboratory records provide a safe, falsifiable partner study."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":82,"causal_archetype_fit":88,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":70,"operational_specificity":87,"falsifiability_test_quality":86,"adopter_partner_path":86,"deployability_complexity":72,"authority_safety_reversibility":93,"strict_potential":78,"empirical_partner_potential":87,"scrutiny_priority":81,"biggest_visible_risk":"Auditing broad development-resource caps is likely to be arbitrary and may favor incumbents with substantial uncounted pre-entry assets and knowledge.","rationale":"Peak-result selection versus durable, reproducible catalyst performance is credible, and archived time-series reconstruction could reveal whether the award signal is misleading. However, endurance prizes, hidden validation, milestone awards, and resource caps look comparatively standard, while comprehensive accounting of batches, compute, expenditure, materials, and outside support is difficult to define and enforce. The retrospective study remains bounded and decision-relevant."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":94,"causal_archetype_fit":92,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":72,"operational_specificity":93,"falsifiability_test_quality":89,"adopter_partner_path":90,"deployability_complexity":78,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":86,"empirical_partner_potential":92,"scrutiny_priority":89,"biggest_visible_risk":"The package may collapse under scrutiny into familiar performance-based procurement, lifecycle costing, bonding, and open-interface requirements rather than preserve a meaningful contrastive claim.","rationale":"The procurement problem is highly consequential and structurally coherent: vendors can exploit self-chosen tests, externalize lifecycle costs, coordinate bids, and create switching barriers. Standardized testing, safety gates, secured duties, and utility-owned interfaces directly alter routes to winning, while the shadow tender is authorized, reversible, and capable of testing ranking changes. Strong partner potential offsets substantial prior-art vulnerability and procurement complexity."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_C"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_A","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals are unusually complete and safely staged, so the main separation is not basic quality but whether the integrated contest design preserves a contrast beyond familiar domain practice. A offers the cleanest bounded partner test; D has the most consequential problem but the greatest risk of reducing to standard procurement controls; B has a stronger structural contrast but a harder measurand problem; C is testable yet most vulnerable to familiar prize-design prior art and impractical resource accounting.","confidence":"MODERATE"}