{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C032","selector_replication":3,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":74,"causal_archetype_fit":84,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":60,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":83,"deployability_complexity":55,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":72,"empirical_partner_potential":86,"scrutiny_priority":78,"biggest_visible_risk":"The task-flow model may mistake legitimate, plural, or accessibility-driven paths for breakdowns while omitting confusion that appears routine without full context.","rationale":"The proposal identifies a credible review-attention problem and specifies reconstruction, audit, fallback, consent, and a decision-relevant shadow study unusually well. The archetype materially determines evidence selection rather than decorating the workflow. Its main weaknesses are substantial modeling and governance overhead, uncertain savings after audits, and a core combination of behavioral anomaly selection and session replay that appears comparatively vulnerable to nearby practice."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":91,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":66,"operational_specificity":95,"falsifiability_test_quality":96,"adopter_partner_path":92,"deployability_complexity":76,"authority_safety_reversibility":98,"strict_potential":84,"empirical_partner_potential":95,"scrutiny_priority":91,"biggest_visible_risk":"A wrong selection or operation can execute exactly as predicted, causing residual emphasis to divert attention from ordinary rows that would have exposed the user's mistaken intent.","rationale":"This is a consequential, readily observable problem with a bounded pre-commit intervention, clear authority, reversible shadow entry point, and an excellent counterbalanced test that can change the deployment decision. Prediction plus an independent dry run is causally central to separating expected effects from unexplained ones. Its strict potential is moderated because exception-focused diff previews, dry runs, and protected warnings are close-looking rivals, though reconstruction, independent sampling, and forced decompression create a meaningful contrast worth scrutinizing."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":93,"causal_archetype_fit":95,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":79,"operational_specificity":92,"falsifiability_test_quality":94,"adopter_partner_path":87,"deployability_complexity":61,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":88,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":94,"biggest_visible_risk":"Predictable command consequences may be essential orientation cues, so technically accurate suppression could still increase confusion, repeated actions, or missed state changes.","rationale":"The serial auditory bottleneck is consequential, and command-conditioned prediction is causally essential to distinguishing routine self-caused transitions from unexpected changes. The proposal has bounded scope, protected-event bypasses, user control, full-speech fallback, and a strong offline-to-supervised evidence path with decisive usability falsifiers. Implementation and accessibility risks are substantial, but the combination of command attribution, structured accessible-tree residuals, reconstruction, and user-controlled decompression presents the strongest text-internal prospect of retaining a meaningful contrastive claim."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":85,"causal_archetype_fit":97,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":53,"operational_specificity":95,"falsifiability_test_quality":96,"adopter_partner_path":85,"deployability_complexity":54,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":77,"empirical_partner_potential":90,"scrutiny_priority":85,"biggest_visible_risk":"Frequent corrections caused by concurrency, hidden constraints, or permission decisions may make provisional rendering more disruptive than waiting for authoritative state.","rationale":"This has the cleanest mechanistic fit: an outgoing command generates provisional state and the authoritative server supplies a reconstructible correction. Digest verification, explicit provisional marking, protected bypasses, and simulator testing make it safe and highly falsifiable. However, matched predictors, sequence control, audits, and snapshots add considerable distributed-systems complexity, while optimistic UI, client prediction, state deltas, and reconciliation are close-looking rivals that make the remaining strict contrast especially vulnerable to prior-art scrutiny."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_A"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_C","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals have unusually strong bounded tests, authority controls, raw-channel audits, and fallback logic. The main separator is not completeness but whether predictive residualization remains causally useful and contrastive after nearby-practice scrutiny: C has the strongest combination, B the clearest partner-ready operational test, D the strongest archetype fit but greatest known-looking systems overlap, and A the least certain net benefit after modeling and audit costs.","confidence":"HIGH"}