{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C025","selector_replication":2,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":90,"causal_archetype_fit":93,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":74,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":94,"adopter_partner_path":88,"deployability_complexity":66,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":79,"empirical_partner_potential":90,"scrutiny_priority":85,"biggest_visible_risk":"A source-aware semantic predictor may reproduce omissions or errors inherited from prior disclosures and source mappings, yielding reassuringly small residuals for consequential missing matters.","rationale":"The proposal addresses a consequential attention-allocation problem and makes prediction, residual comparison, reconstruction, independent raw review, and fallback causally central. Its frozen historical replay is bounded and decision-changing, with unusually strong authority limits. The main weakness is implementation burden: predicting narrative meaning and required source-driven changes across disclosures is substantially harder than reconstructing more structured financial states, and the governance and full-review safeguards may erase the capacity benefit."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":91,"causal_archetype_fit":92,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":69,"operational_specificity":93,"falsifiability_test_quality":94,"adopter_partner_path":92,"deployability_complexity":78,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":82,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":89,"biggest_visible_risk":"Evidence can match the predicted envelope while the underlying control is poorly performed, manipulated, or substantively ineffective.","rationale":"Recurring control occurrences provide stable, observable units, and the proposal carefully limits prediction to the evidence envelope rather than control effectiveness. The twelve-control replay, simple rules rival, blinded full-package inspection, explicit miss accounting, and joint controllership/internal-audit authority create an excellent partner study. It remains vulnerable to resembling continuous control monitoring, workflow validation, or process-conformance practice, but reconstructive expectations, independent sampling, and governed fallback preserve a potentially meaningful contrast."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":88,"causal_archetype_fit":94,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":66,"operational_specificity":92,"falsifiability_test_quality":93,"adopter_partner_path":84,"deployability_complexity":70,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":78,"empirical_partner_potential":87,"scrutiny_priority":83,"biggest_visible_risk":"Both entities may share the same erroneous agreement schedule or mapping, causing bilateral predictor agreement to suppress a common accounting error.","rationale":"This is the cleanest predictive-codec mapping: synchronized bilateral baselines and signed residuals directly support reconstruction and early mismatch resolution. The completed-close replay is bounded and falsifiable. However, complete-schedule matching, confirmations, recurring journals, and intercompany reconciliation systems are conspicuous rivals, while bilateral approvals, synchronization, tax sensitivity, and counterparty coordination make adoption and deployment materially harder than the single-organization alternatives."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":92,"causal_archetype_fit":91,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":64,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":95,"adopter_partner_path":94,"deployability_complexity":87,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":80,"empirical_partner_potential":96,"scrutiny_priority":92,"biggest_visible_risk":"The design may prove to be a sophisticated form of familiar reconciliation variance or anomaly review, leaving little contrastive claim after prior-art scrutiny.","rationale":"The problem is common, consequential, and unusually tractable with existing ledger and reconciliation data. The one-entity, forty-account shadow test has clear comparators, independent reconstruction, raw sampling, miss tracking, effort accounting, and a credible go/no-go decision. Read-only operation, explicit bypasses, and controller/internal-audit authority make the first step highly reversible. Its primary weakness is distinctiveness, but its exceptional empirical-partner path makes it the best first scrutiny target."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_C"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_D","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals use the archetype substantively and specify unusually strong shadow tests, authority boundaries, independent raw review, and rollback. The main discriminator is not problem seriousness but the tradeoff between contrastiveness and practical partner execution: D and B offer the fastest decisive studies, A offers greater textual and source-aware differentiation at much higher modeling cost, and C has an elegant mapping but greater bilateral coordination and visible rival exposure.","confidence":"MODERATE"}