{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C025","selector_replication":3,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":86,"causal_archetype_fit":90,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":78,"operational_specificity":92,"falsifiability_test_quality":90,"adopter_partner_path":78,"deployability_complexity":88,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":83,"empirical_partner_potential":88,"scrutiny_priority":86,"biggest_visible_risk":"The semantic and source-aware predictor may require so much modeling, integration, and governed full-review backstop that it releases no net review capacity.","rationale":"The problem is consequential, and the reconstructible expected-document state makes the residual archetype more than a redline or alert layer. The frozen historical replay, independent source-to-draft inspection, explicit missed-issue criterion, and read-only authority boundary are strong. Its main weakness is implementation burden: narrative semantics, source mappings, cross-references, protected topics, snapshots, and final full review create many dependencies, while prediction matching can anchor reviewers against genuinely new obligations."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":84,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":64,"operational_specificity":92,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":89,"deployability_complexity":69,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":76,"empirical_partner_potential":91,"scrutiny_priority":81,"biggest_visible_risk":"Evidence can match the predicted envelope while the underlying control was ineffective, making the residual representation weakly coupled to the outcome that ultimately matters.","rationale":"Missing executions, role conflicts, population changes, and evidence-lineage failures are important and observable, and the quarter replay with independent full-package inspection could decisively test suppression safety. The authority split between controllership and internal audit is unusually clear. However, much of the operational surface resembles continuous control monitoring, workflow validation, and conformance checking, while the proposal explicitly excludes control effectiveness from its prediction target; that limits both its contrastive claim and the causal reach of the archetype."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":92,"causal_archetype_fit":96,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":84,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":93,"adopter_partner_path":84,"deployability_complexity":74,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":91,"empirical_partner_potential":93,"scrutiny_priority":93,"biggest_visible_risk":"A synchronized bilateral baseline can encode a shared accounting or mapping error, causing both entities to reconstruct matching but wrong states.","rationale":"This is the clearest case where the archetype is causally essential: matched predictors, checksums, signed residuals, heartbeats, and reconstruction directly change what counterparties exchange, rather than merely ranking alerts. The problem is concrete and consequential, the protocol is bounded to recurring bilateral flows, and complete schedules provide a strong ground truth for the proposed historical replay. Cross-entity governance adds friction, but the study is reversible and can measure reconstruction failures, missed discrepancies, coordination effort, and shared-model blind spots before operational suppression."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":93,"causal_archetype_fit":89,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":62,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":95,"adopter_partner_path":95,"deployability_complexity":56,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":78,"empirical_partner_potential":96,"scrutiny_priority":88,"biggest_visible_risk":"The residual-first layer may prove to be a more elaborate version of established risk-based reconciliation and anomaly-review practice, leaving little meaningful contrastive claim.","rationale":"Recurring reconciliation review is a highly credible attention problem, and the proposed 40-account shadow test is the strongest and easiest partner experiment in the set: complete conventional workpapers exist, findings and reviewer effort are measurable, and no live accounting action is authorized. The reconstructive residual packets, independent sampling, protected bypasses, and decompression rules are specific and safe. Its strict potential is constrained because predictive roll-forwards, variance analysis, exception routing, and risk-based review are close-looking rivals, so scrutiny must determine whether reconstruction and governed suppression add more than an implementation bundle."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_B"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_C","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals have unusually strong authority boundaries, rollback rules, and retrospective tests. C leads because residual reconstruction is intrinsic to bilateral communication and supports both strict and partner lanes. D is the best near-term empirical-partner opportunity but is highly exposed to standard-practice prior art. A has a stronger contrastive architecture than D or B but materially greater semantic and governance complexity. B is testable and important, yet its observable evidence envelope is least tightly connected to the ultimate control-effectiveness objective.","confidence":"HIGH"}