{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C052","selector_replication":2,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":86,"causal_archetype_fit":85,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":78,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":86,"adopter_partner_path":77,"deployability_complexity":80,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":85,"empirical_partner_potential":85,"scrutiny_priority":85,"biggest_visible_risk":"The observance could become emotionally resonant institutional theater that displaces or legitimizes underfunded identification and stewardship work.","rationale":"The proposal identifies a consequential long-horizon handoff problem and gives ritual a credible causal role in preserving shared duty, tacit stewardship, and recognition across turnover. Its synthetic first step is unusually safe and bounded, with clear retirement authority and operational closure. The main uncertainty is whether shared meaning adds measurable continuity beyond well-run administrative review and succession processes."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":94,"causal_archetype_fit":77,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":72,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":93,"adopter_partner_path":73,"deployability_complexity":66,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":80,"empirical_partner_potential":87,"scrutiny_priority":83,"biggest_visible_risk":"Symbolic retirement may be mistaken for legal relief or completed downstream reconciliation despite unresolved copies, permissions, and lawful-retention distinctions.","rationale":"The underlying propagation problem is highly consequential, and the proposal is precise about authority, exceptions, provenance, and a matched conventional-briefing comparison. It offers a strong partner-resolvable uncertainty about whether enactment improves cross-custodian understanding and routing. Its strict potential is limited by legal and systems complexity and by the possibility that the ritual layer is unnecessary once reconciliation governance is competent."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":89,"causal_archetype_fit":74,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":57,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":91,"adopter_partner_path":71,"deployability_complexity":70,"authority_safety_reversibility":92,"strict_potential":74,"empirical_partner_potential":82,"scrutiny_priority":76,"biggest_visible_risk":"The ritual may blur into familiar interagency tabletop training while adding coercive synchrony, hierarchy, and procedural-confusion risks.","rationale":"Scene-boundary and handoff ambiguity is consequential, and the synthetic comparison study could decisively test adjacent-role understanding and action ownership. However, reenactment, paced handoffs, and interface repair closely resemble the functions of ordinary exercises and briefings, weakening the remaining contrastive claim. Multiagency coordination and rank pressure also make adoption and genuinely voluntary participation harder."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":91,"causal_archetype_fit":82,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":68,"operational_specificity":92,"falsifiability_test_quality":87,"adopter_partner_path":90,"deployability_complexity":92,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":87,"empirical_partner_potential":92,"scrutiny_priority":89,"biggest_visible_risk":"Laboratory leadership could use symbolic candor and repair recognition to legitimize existing practice without improving report limits, corrective memory, or disclosure.","rationale":"This is the most readily partner-testable proposal: one laboratory can authorize a low-risk synthetic pilot, inspect bounded artifacts, track a quality action, and compare the cycle with ordinary quality routines. The trace-claim-limit-person structure gives the archetype a plausible role in making epistemic responsibility and corrective memory socially durable. Its chief weakness is possible redundancy with quality meetings, ethics training, and corrective-action systems, but that uncertainty is explicit and cheaply falsifiable."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_C"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_D","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals are unusually bounded and safety-conscious, so the main discriminator is whether ritual supplies a causally distinct function beyond administrative review, training, or quality management. D has the clearest single-partner test path; A has the strongest intrinsically symbolic stewardship case; B has exceptional importance but substantial legal-system complexity; C is most vulnerable to collapsing into an ordinary tabletop exercise.","confidence":"MODERATE"}