{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C019","selector_replication":2,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":88,"causal_archetype_fit":92,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":67,"operational_specificity":96,"falsifiability_test_quality":96,"adopter_partner_path":93,"deployability_complexity":78,"authority_safety_reversibility":98,"strict_potential":86,"empirical_partner_potential":95,"scrutiny_priority":92,"biggest_visible_risk":"The cell may merely formalize a familiar cross-functional review or project-management lane, leaving little contrastive claim beyond synchronized scheduling and standardized intake.","rationale":"The proposal targets a consequential and observable coordination failure, makes the reusable-cell mechanism causally central, and specifies unusually clear admission, authority, capacity, regeneration, and rollback boundaries. Its archived-file comparison can decisively test burden reduction without live commitments. Scrutiny should focus on whether coordination is truly rate-limiting and whether benefits persist after holding specialist labor and case difficulty constant."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":82,"causal_archetype_fit":89,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":50,"operational_specificity":93,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":90,"deployability_complexity":73,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":73,"empirical_partner_potential":91,"scrutiny_priority":82,"biggest_visible_risk":"The standing relay strongly resembles established expert-panel and iterative elicitation practice, making the remaining distinctive claim narrow and vulnerable to prior-art scrutiny.","rationale":"Repeated expert search, trust formation, translation, and governance are credible barriers, and the proposal carefully protects dissent, consent, confidentiality, and policy authority. The shadow study is bounded and partner-feasible. However, heterogeneous questions may limit reuse, maintained panels may become homogeneous, and faster elicitation does not resolve poor question framing or governance conflict."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":92,"causal_archetype_fit":97,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":81,"operational_specificity":97,"falsifiability_test_quality":97,"adopter_partner_path":95,"deployability_complexity":69,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":92,"empirical_partner_potential":98,"scrutiny_priority":97,"biggest_visible_risk":"A modular rehearsal bed may reduce setup only by constraining scenario variety or realism, producing repeatable but weakly transferable evidence.","rationale":"This is the strongest causal realization: a fixed, resettable bed directly removes repeated exercise construction while preserving scenario-specific participants, plans, and judgment as cofactors. The problem is consequential, authority boundaries are explicit, and the counterbalanced synthetic probe can test reuse on a second cycle while detecting rig-attributable error. Deployment is comparatively demanding, but a port partner could resolve the decisive validity and turnover uncertainties safely."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":79,"causal_archetype_fit":87,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":45,"operational_specificity":95,"falsifiability_test_quality":97,"adopter_partner_path":95,"deployability_complexity":91,"authority_safety_reversibility":99,"strict_potential":78,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":87,"biggest_visible_risk":"The intervention may be ordinary workflow standardization and templating applied to a modest formatting problem rather than a causally distinctive facilitator addressing a consequential bottleneck.","rationale":"The kernel is exceptionally bounded, reversible, deployable, and testable on completed dossiers, with clear quality falsifiers and no live decision exposure. Its empirical-partner lane is therefore strong. Strict potential is reduced by the possibility that downstream committee capacity is the real constraint and that the intervention's reusable contract, template, validation, and routing components are known-looking administrative practice."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_B"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_C","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals offer authorized shadow studies and unusually strong rollback design. The main separation is between C and A, where the reusable facilitator is causally substantial and tied to consequential operational preparation, versus D and B, whose interventions are easier to test but more vulnerable to collapsing into familiar templating or expert-elicitation practice. C should receive scrutiny first because it combines the strongest archetype fit with the most decision-relevant partner-resolvable uncertainty.","confidence":"HIGH"}