{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C023","selector_replication":2,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":76,"causal_archetype_fit":82,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":58,"operational_specificity":88,"falsifiability_test_quality":84,"adopter_partner_path":81,"deployability_complexity":69,"authority_safety_reversibility":91,"strict_potential":70,"empirical_partner_potential":82,"scrutiny_priority":74,"biggest_visible_risk":"The gateway may merely formalize ordinary librarian, ethics, and community-liaison work while adding coordination overhead and informal gatekeeping power.","rationale":"The repeated context-reconstruction burden is credible, and the proposal tightly bounds eligibility, outputs, authority, workload, and rollback. Its twelve-case comparison could resolve whether maintained relationships and a shared dossier actually reduce duplicated labor. The main weakness is contrastiveness: much of the intervention resembles a carefully governed reference or consultation service, while community-specific work may resist reusable standardization."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":65,"causal_archetype_fit":77,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":61,"operational_specificity":86,"falsifiability_test_quality":80,"adopter_partner_path":74,"deployability_complexity":48,"authority_safety_reversibility":86,"strict_potential":53,"empirical_partner_potential":70,"scrutiny_priority":59,"biggest_visible_risk":"The proposition graph may encode a curator's contested theological system, making apparently reusable dependency paths systematically misleading rather than merely incomplete.","rationale":"The claim-card interface, module boundaries, specialist lane, and pilot are concrete and reversible. However, the central barrier is less clearly separable from substantive theological reasoning: doctrinal consequences often depend on argument, history, and interpretive school. Building and maintaining a trustworthy graph could consume more expert labor than it saves, and useful prompts may be difficult to distinguish from false or trivial paths."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":88,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":60,"operational_specificity":92,"falsifiability_test_quality":90,"adopter_partner_path":91,"deployability_complexity":72,"authority_safety_reversibility":92,"strict_potential":79,"empirical_partner_potential":92,"scrutiny_priority":84,"biggest_visible_risk":"A reusable annotation grammar may impose artificial event boundaries and comparability on ritual records whose meaningful segmentation is inseparable from local context and interpretation.","rationale":"Repeated transcription, alignment, segmentation, and reconciliation are concrete burdens, and the intervention separates mechanical processing from interpretive authority unusually well. The matched authorized excerpts, independent review, layer-separation errors, labor accounting, and recalibration test create a strong partner-resolvable experiment. Prior-art vulnerability is substantial because annotation platforms, codebooks, and calibrated coding teams are familiar, but the bounded multilayer workflow still supports a meaningful empirical contrast."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":92,"causal_archetype_fit":93,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":66,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":88,"deployability_complexity":80,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":88,"empirical_partner_potential":90,"scrutiny_priority":90,"biggest_visible_risk":"Calendar identification and historical assumptions may constitute the substantive research itself, so automation could hide contested premises while contributing little beyond familiar conversion arithmetic.","rationale":"This has the clearest bounded transformation, reusable mechanism, compatibility conditions, and decision-relevant output. Preserving the original expression, alternatives, assumptions, sensitivity, and intervals directly addresses false precision without claiming historical truth. The two-module matched pilot can test labor reduction, selectivity, uncertainty preservation, and recovery with low-risk rollback. Generic calendar converters and scholarly conversion tables create prior-art vulnerability, but the proposed contrast rests on explicit historical variants and uncertainty propagation rather than arithmetic alone."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_B"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_D","portfolio_observation":"D and C offer the strongest scrutiny targets because their recurring transformations are concrete, instrumentable, and testable on already-authorized materials. A is a credible partner study but may collapse into a governed reference service. B is the most structurally fragile because its reusable representation may be inseparable from the contested scholarly judgment it aims to accelerate.","confidence":"HIGH"}