{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C039","selector_replication":1,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":78,"causal_archetype_fit":89,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":67,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":91,"adopter_partner_path":79,"deployability_complexity":81,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":81,"empirical_partner_potential":83,"scrutiny_priority":83,"biggest_visible_risk":"The proposed physical-equivalence relation may be scientifically incomplete or non-transitive under tolerance, making identity unstable or forcing representation-specific concepts back into the contract.","rationale":"The ordered-periodic scope, typed exclusions, two independent adapters, metamorphic transformations, and preregistered halt conditions make this unusually executable and safe. The abstraction is causally central because the stated failures arise from clients observing encodings rather than declared material meaning. Its main weakness is that crystallographic identity contains difficult scientific distinctions and tolerance behavior; success on a small fixture set may not yield a robust deployable identity boundary. The approach also resembles broadly familiar semantic-interface and canonicalization alternatives, leaving its contrast dependent on demonstrating substitution without a shared canonical form."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":88,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":62,"operational_specificity":95,"falsifiability_test_quality":95,"adopter_partner_path":88,"deployability_complexity":78,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":80,"empirical_partner_potential":92,"scrutiny_priority":86,"biggest_visible_risk":"An internally consistent ledger cannot repair missing labels, unrecorded transfers, uncertain quantities, or invented legacy ancestry, so representation may not be the dominant cause of consequential lineage failures.","rationale":"The proposal addresses consequential custody, ancestry, and allocation failures with precise operations, invariants, atomicity, idempotency, correction semantics, mutation tests, and a bounded synthetic study. A laboratory-information-system owner and custodian provide a credible partner path, and legacy replay could decisively expose where the abstraction fails. Strict potential is reduced because event-ledger, audit-log, and transactional-inventory practices are close-looking rivals, while real deployment additionally depends on access control, signatures, reconciliation, and incomplete physical records outside the contract."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":86,"causal_archetype_fit":94,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":72,"operational_specificity":96,"falsifiability_test_quality":96,"adopter_partner_path":88,"deployability_complexity":87,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":91,"empirical_partner_potential":90,"scrutiny_priority":92,"biggest_visible_risk":"Numerical tolerance and sparse sampling could certify evaluators that agree at tested points while diverging materially between points or near boundaries.","rationale":"This is the cleanest strict opportunity: one scientific-model release is explicitly held fixed, representation details are hidden, observable behavior is sharply defined, and scientific revisions are separated from evaluator substitutions. The analytic-versus-spline experiment, boundary checks, metamorphic relations, corrupted evaluator, and forbidden extrapolation provide a decision-changing test with minimal operational risk. Its contrast with mandated formats and grids is meaningful, though scrutiny must determine how much similar evaluator-independent conformance practice already exists and whether tolerances can define a stable acceptance relation."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":94,"causal_archetype_fit":95,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":77,"operational_specificity":96,"falsifiability_test_quality":97,"adopter_partner_path":84,"deployability_complexity":72,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":84,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":91,"biggest_visible_risk":"Simulator conformance may create false confidence because timing, calibration, control dynamics, firmware safeguards, and cutoff latency can remain scientifically and physically consequential on actual instruments.","rationale":"The stateful runtime contract is causally essential rather than decorative: sign conventions, authorization gates, cutoff precedence, stale data, abort behavior, and terminal states directly determine execution. The fake-driver study is exceptionally bounded, safe, mutation-tested, and capable of falsifying the proposed abstraction, making this the strongest empirical-partner opportunity. Strict potential is lower than C because hardware qualification remains complex and software-equivalent traces cannot establish physical or scientific substitutability, but the explicit separation of software eligibility from hardware approval preserves a strong contrastive claim."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_A"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_C","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals are unusually specific and testable applications of representation-independent behavioral contracts. C offers the best balance of strict contrast, bounded deployment, and decisive testing; D is the strongest partner-led study but carries a larger hardware-to-software validity gap. B is highly consequential and partner-ready yet vulnerable to standard ledger practice and missing physical facts. A is technically coherent but faces the hardest abstract-equivalence and tolerance problem relative to its demonstrated consequence.","confidence":"HIGH"}