{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C014","selector_replication":1,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":88,"causal_archetype_fit":86,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":55,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":93,"adopter_partner_path":86,"deployability_complexity":72,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":80,"empirical_partner_potential":91,"scrutiny_priority":88,"biggest_visible_risk":"The lane may prove to be ordinary configuration-data cleanup and workflow automation rather than a meaningfully distinct reusable facilitation mechanism.","rationale":"The proposal targets a consequential, sharply observable post-maintenance delay and preserves all airworthiness and release authority. Its shadow study can separate evidence-assembly time from parts, testing, defect, and signatory delays, and any false-ready packet stops progression. Scope, interfaces, exceptions, baseline, and decision-changing falsifiers are unusually concrete. Prior-art vulnerability is substantial because rules-based conformity packets, configuration management, and specialist exception queues look like familiar practice, but the proposal still merits first scrutiny because a partner can cheaply determine whether repeated reconstruction is genuinely rate-limiting and whether the governed lane reduces it without shifting risk or workload."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":82,"causal_archetype_fit":96,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":31,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":77,"deployability_complexity":57,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":60,"empirical_partner_potential":84,"scrutiny_priority":69,"biggest_visible_risk":"An ozone-decomposition catalyst cartridge for aircraft environmental-control air appears highly vulnerable to direct prior art, leaving little meaningful contrast beyond regeneration and monitoring details.","rationale":"This is a literal and causally essential catalytic intervention with strong inert-bed and blank controls, repeated-cycle assays, byproduct monitoring, and a safe non-flight first step. A suitably equipped laboratory could decisively test conversion, pressure loss, shedding, selectivity, deactivation, and regeneration. Its scrutiny value is reduced by the known-looking core intervention and by the long integration path from duct rig to an aircraft-qualified component; moreover, regeneration may add little if replacement cartridges are simpler or if the material behaves as a finite sorbent."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":84,"causal_archetype_fit":82,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":61,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":84,"adopter_partner_path":66,"deployability_complexity":49,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":73,"empirical_partner_potential":82,"scrutiny_priority":81,"biggest_visible_risk":"A synthetic tabletop may show faster message assembly while failing to establish that live diversions are materially constrained by coordination rather than physical capacity, authoritative decisions, or existing channels.","rationale":"The standing broker is structurally credible: it reuses authenticated relationships, common fields, parallel invocation, expiry rules, and post-case restoration while expressly preserving pilot, air-traffic, airport, and emergency authority. The matched tabletop is bounded and can expose false confirmations, saturation, stale contacts, workload transfer, and authority confusion. However, the multi-party governance and adoption burden is high, exercises underrepresent live stress, and regional coordination centers or shared-status services may be close rivals. It deserves early scrutiny because the contrastive claim is still potentially meaningful and a willing consortium could resolve much of the uncertainty without operational exposure."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":67,"causal_archetype_fit":88,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":18,"operational_specificity":93,"falsifiability_test_quality":94,"adopter_partner_path":88,"deployability_complexity":84,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":48,"empirical_partner_potential":76,"scrutiny_priority":57,"biggest_visible_risk":"The removable micro-roughness cassette appears to be a packaging and maintenance refinement of standard boundary-layer tripping rather than a durable contrastive opportunity.","rationale":"The proposal is exceptionally testable and reversible: smooth inserts, multiple specimens, spatial transition measurements, attachment checks, fouling, regeneration, and strict tunnel halts can resolve performance quickly. The archetype maps physically and the intervention is easy for a wind-tunnel partner to probe. Nonetheless, the problem is narrower and less consequential than the others, while roughness-based transition triggering is so standard-looking that prior-art scrutiny is likely to collapse the claim to a removable calibrated insert with cleaning and provenance controls."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_D"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_A","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals are unusually bounded, safe, and falsifiable; the main separator is not experimental quality but whether a meaningful contrastive claim is likely to remain. A and C offer the best combination of consequential operational barriers and partner-resolvable uncertainty, whereas B and especially D are more literal archetype matches but visibly vulnerable to mature, standard-looking technical practice.","confidence":"HIGH"}