{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp07_retrospective_selector60_20260803","cell_code":"E7C059","selector_replication":3,"assessments":[{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_A","problem_reality_importance":83,"causal_archetype_fit":75,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":58,"operational_specificity":91,"falsifiability_test_quality":87,"adopter_partner_path":85,"deployability_complexity":68,"authority_safety_reversibility":94,"strict_potential":74,"empirical_partner_potential":86,"scrutiny_priority":78,"biggest_visible_risk":"The ritual layer may add coercive theater to functions that a provenance register, accountable onboarding, and publication gates could perform more directly.","rationale":"The turnover and interpretive-provenance problem is consequential and observably specified. The proposal tightly bounds authority, uses a synthetic rehearsal, preserves refusal, and tests both participant experience and later manuscript conduct. Its weakest point is causal necessity: most practical effects arise from the obligation register, ownership, and publication checkpoints, leaving the marked enactment vulnerable to a lighter documentation-and-review rival."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_B","problem_reality_importance":87,"causal_archetype_fit":87,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":73,"operational_specificity":93,"falsifiability_test_quality":91,"adopter_partner_path":89,"deployability_complexity":70,"authority_safety_reversibility":93,"strict_potential":85,"empirical_partner_potential":91,"scrutiny_priority":88,"biggest_visible_risk":"Delegates may be essentialized or pressured to perform a single tradition-wide position despite limited or contested authority.","rationale":"The loss of qualified disagreement across editorial turnover is concrete, consequential, and structurally matched to witnessed recognition and handoff. The intervention preserves distinct states of assent, contestation, withholding, and insufficient authority, then binds them to publication consequences. Its bounded low-stakes pilot can decisively compare successor comprehension and artifact consistency against ordinary issue logs and transition memoranda."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_C","problem_reality_importance":91,"causal_archetype_fit":80,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":69,"operational_specificity":90,"falsifiability_test_quality":86,"adopter_partner_path":77,"deployability_complexity":82,"authority_safety_reversibility":92,"strict_potential":73,"empirical_partner_potential":84,"scrutiny_priority":76,"biggest_visible_risk":"The assembly could instrumentalize community grief and visibility while directing attention and resources toward ceremonially compelling losses rather than preservation risk.","rationale":"Archival loss and repeated custodial burden are highly consequential, and the proposal carefully separates acknowledgment, delayed consent, and funded work orders. Authority and rollback protections are unusually strong. However, deployment requires sensitive custodial participation, layered disclosure, resource commitments, and equity controls; the operational benefit may come mainly from preservation governance and work-order conversion rather than the assembly itself."},{"blind_id":"CANDIDATE_D","problem_reality_importance":88,"causal_archetype_fit":84,"distinctiveness_prior_art_resilience":65,"operational_specificity":94,"falsifiability_test_quality":92,"adopter_partner_path":93,"deployability_complexity":61,"authority_safety_reversibility":95,"strict_potential":86,"empirical_partner_potential":94,"scrutiny_priority":91,"biggest_visible_risk":"A retirement observance could become a reputational purge that ceremonially stigmatizes contested scholarship or its sponsors.","rationale":"The persistence of misleading tools through social inertia and fragmented ownership is credible and directly observable in consortium-controlled artifacts. The proposal has a narrow authority boundary, reversible status categories, a low-stakes partner pilot, and decision-relevant checks on artifact updates, status comprehension, pressure, and preserved dissent. Although ordinary deprecation policy is a strong rival, the explicit withdrawal of sponsorship and witnessed status change supply a plausible contrastive mechanism worth early scrutiny."}],"rank_order":["CANDIDATE_D","CANDIDATE_B","CANDIDATE_A","CANDIDATE_C"],"top_choice":"CANDIDATE_D","portfolio_observation":"All four proposals are unusually specific, reversible, and partner-testable, but each risks locating its practical effect in the accompanying register, editorial control, work order, or artifact update rather than in ritual enactment. D and B offer the cleanest bounded comparisons because status clarity, successor comprehension, and owned artifact changes can be measured without initially involving sensitive testimony or grief.","confidence":"HIGH"}