{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C048","selector_replication":3,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":91,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":74,"operational_specificity":95,"falsifiability_test_quality":93,"adopter_partner_path":92,"deployability_complexity":80,"authority_safety_reversibility":96,"strict_potential":84,"empirical_partner_potential":93,"scrutiny_priority":87,"biggest_visible_risk":"The state-machine contract may force relational and negotiated mutual aid into deceptively crisp commitment states, creating pressure or false certainty rather than merely removing representation coupling.","rationale":"The proposal identifies consequential duplicate, missed, stale, and privacy-leaking handoffs and makes the abstraction causally central through authority-scoped transitions, idempotency, opacity, and adapter conformance. Its fictional tabletop is bounded, reversible, and capable of exposing unmappable states or hidden-data dependencies. Scrutiny should focus on whether this is a genuine recurring federation problem and whether the contrast exceeds familiar workflow APIs and integration patterns."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":92,"causal_archetype_fit":95,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":68,"operational_specificity":97,"falsifiability_test_quality":97,"adopter_partner_path":92,"deployability_complexity":85,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":84,"empirical_partner_potential":95,"scrutiny_priority":89,"biggest_visible_risk":"The core intervention may prove largely equivalent to familiar reproducible-sampling, immutable-snapshot, deduplication, and data-abstraction practices, leaving little meaningful contrastive claim.","rationale":"Representation-dependent changes to eligibility, multiplicity, seeded selection, and inclusion probabilities are concrete and methodologically serious. The abstraction is essential rather than decorative, and permutation, reserialization, duplicate consolidation, and deliberately broken adapters form an unusually decisive synthetic test. Strong governance boundaries preserve substantive sampling decisions, although scrutiny must test prior-art vulnerability and whether actual workflows suffer the claimed coupling."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":96,"causal_archetype_fit":92,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":78,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":96,"deployability_complexity":77,"authority_safety_reversibility":97,"strict_potential":86,"empirical_partner_potential":97,"scrutiny_priority":93,"biggest_visible_risk":"A technically conforming opaque adapter could misrepresent or legitimize contested community authority while concealing distinctions, dissent, or coercion that archive staff should not treat as implementation detail.","rationale":"Unauthorized release or withholding of culturally sensitive material is highly consequential, and the proposal tightly connects that risk to representation-dependent permission interpretation. Its operations, non-widening laws, community authorization, leakage checks, and non-live rollback path are specific and safe. A willing community partner can decisively test whether legitimate decisions map without semantic loss, making this the strongest empirical-partner candidate even if strict survival depends on distinguishing the contract from established archive permission and governance systems."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":83,"causal_archetype_fit":93,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":67,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":94,"adopter_partner_path":87,"deployability_complexity":82,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":79,"empirical_partner_potential":89,"scrutiny_priority":81,"biggest_visible_risk":"The proposal may formalize a standard provenance-aware graph or data-access layer around a comparatively narrow problem, while the decisive disagreements remain substantive ethnographic interpretation rather than representation coupling.","rationale":"The distinctions among unknown, unasked, denied, contradictory, and superseded claims make the abstraction structurally credible, and table-versus-graph testing can falsify implementation equivalence cleanly. The synthetic first step is safe and well bounded. Relative to the others, however, the consequence is less immediate, the adopter path is narrower, and both prior-art resemblance and vocabulary-flattening risk threaten the remaining contrastive value."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_C","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_D"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_C","portfolio_observation":"All four are unusually complete behavioral-abstraction proposals with safe synthetic first steps, so the main differentiators are problem consequence, partner-resolvable semantic uncertainty, and vulnerability to familiar data-contract or workflow patterns. C leads through consequence and community-partner testability; B follows through exceptionally decisive conformance tests; A is strong but faces relational-state and adoption risks; D is rigorous but narrower and more prior-art vulnerable.","confidence":"HIGH"}