{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp09_archetype_breadth150_20260804","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp09_light_prior_art_20260804","cell_id":"context_keyed_representation_switching__accounting_auditing","search_lanes":{"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"queries":["account mapping versioning consolidation local statutory reporting same ERP journal audit trail","financial consolidation mapping sets versioned context reporting basis elimination rules"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"no_result_note":null},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"queries":["chart of accounts mapping version control statutory group reporting consolidation","multidimensional accounting alternate accounting principles ledger mapping"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_and_standards":{"queries":["SAP S/4HANA group reporting accounting principle consolidation chart of accounts mapping","Oracle FCCS data maps consolidation mappings audit","Microsoft Dynamics 365 local global chart of accounts consolidation mapping"],"source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null},"component_combination":{"queries":["versioned mapping package context key effective period consolidation perimeter provenance","account mapping audit trail effective date consolidation rule version","consolidation template history rerun mapping runtime version"],"source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","title":"Educational Module 9—Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements","publisher":"IFRS Foundation","url":"https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/supporting-implementation/smes/2025-modules/module-9.pdf","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","claims_supported":["Separate entity records and consolidated reporting require different treatments of the same intragroup transactions.","Intercompany transactions and balances are eliminated in combined or consolidated financial statements.","Examples retain rent expense and income in individual records but eliminate their effects in the combined statements."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"Plan your local chart of accounts","publisher":"Microsoft","url":"https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/finance/general-ledger/plan-local-chart-of-accounts","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["Dynamics 365 supports separate local and global charts of accounts and mappings between them.","Multiple localization or consolidation requirements can be represented through consolidation groups and additional consolidation accounts.","Microsoft identifies externally maintained mapping as prone to error when financial reports are created."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"What's New in SAP Group Reporting Data Collection","publisher":"SAP","url":"https://help.sap.com/docs/r/33a488174d72470ba0bc1c81bc8fdebf/1.0/en-US/71a22eb9701a4e71915de25436266199.html","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["SAP data-mapping jobs have traceability logs.","The logs preserve the mapping-file version used at job runtime rather than substituting the current version at download.","Mapping definitions and runs use consolidation-version, consolidation-chart-of-accounts, consolidation-unit, and consolidation-group context fields or filters."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"Online financial consolidations","publisher":"Microsoft","url":"https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/finance/general-ledger/consolidate-online","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["Dynamics 365 executes consolidation using a selected template, date range, and legal entities.","Consolidation history records the template, dates, entities, review state, and reversals for audit purposes.","The product can rerun the same template, dates, and legal entity after removing and regenerating the prior consolidation transactions."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"The underlying semantic conflict is visible: official IFRS material shows transactions retained in entity records but eliminated in consolidated or combined statements. Microsoft documents recurring local/global chart mappings and calls external mapping error-prone, while SAP's preservation of the runtime mapping-file version shows that mapping provenance is operationally material. The retained sources do not directly demonstrate the proposal's stronger factual allegation that edits or cached results commonly overwrite or bleed between reporting contexts.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"]},"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"SAP Group Reporting Data Collection mapping definitions and traceability logs","source_ids":["SRC3"],"overlap":"Uses explicit consolidation dimensions as mapping context and preserves the mapping-file version actually used by a run in its traceability log.","remaining_difference":"The opened documentation does not establish a fail-closed selector for a complete entity/basis/perimeter/period tuple, write isolation of inactive packages and caches, an atomic context transition, or a local-to-group-to-local hash-and-output re-entry test."},{"name":"Microsoft Dynamics 365 local/global chart-of-accounts mapping and consolidation groups","source_ids":["SRC2"],"overlap":"Maintains distinct local and global accounting representations and maps source accounts into localization or consolidation structures.","remaining_difference":"It is organized around charts, consolidation companies, and mapping configuration rather than a bank of immutable context-keyed packages with visible runtime identity, namespace isolation, and tested reinstatement."},{"name":"Microsoft Dynamics 365 consolidation templates, history, and rerun","source_ids":["SRC4"],"overlap":"Selects a consolidation template and period, retains an auditable execution history, and can rerun the same context after removing and regenerating consolidation transactions.","remaining_difference":"Rerun and history are close to reproducibility but do not document preservation and isolation of multiple incompatible mapping packages or comparison of a reinstated package hash and output after an intervening alternate-context run."}],"prior_art_disposition":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","contrastive_claim_remaining":"For one shared frozen journal substrate, a complete approved entity–reporting-basis–perimeter–period key deterministically selects exactly one visibly identified mapping package; inactive package mappings and derived state are write-isolated; context changes clear derived state atomically and fail closed on unknown keys; and a prior context reproduces the same package hash, mapping decisions, and output after an intervening run under another context. The retained sources disclose substantial pieces but not this complete testable combination.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The claim would be falsified if an existing documented accounting platform already performs the complete combination, or if the shadow replay shows cross-package mutation, surviving mixed cache state, ambiguous package identity, or failure to reproduce the first local-context hash and output after a local-to-group-to-local sequence.","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The bounded search covered direct descriptions, older chart-of-accounts terminology, commercial consolidation products, official accounting guidance, and combinations of mapping version, context, provenance, history, and rerun. Four opened sources from three publishers were retained, including official guidance and first-party product documentation.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The sources support recurring context-dependent treatment, local/global mappings, mapping-error exposure, and the importance of runtime mapping provenance. Evidence for actual overwrite or cache bleed is absent, so the problem is only partly supported rather than fully supported.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"]},"distinct_testable_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The residual claim is operationally distinct and falsifiable through package-identity, mutation, derived-state, and re-entry comparisons; none of the retained sources documents the full isolation-and-reinstatement combination.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"bounded_next_test":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A read-only replay can use one frozen journal snapshot, two approved packages, a small transaction set, pre/post hashes, visible package identifiers, minimal-pair comparisons, and a local-to-group-to-local reproduction check. This is bounded and produces a clear pass/fail result without production writes.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"]},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The proposed first test is read-only, uses controller-approved contexts and frozen data, blocks ambiguous keys, excludes journal or issued-report modification, and has explicit halt and rollback conditions. No obvious safety or authority stop is visible for that bounded test.","source_ids":[]}},"screen_survival":true,"world_novelty_boundary":"This light public-web screen found adjacent commercial and standards-based practices but no opened source documenting the entire claimed combination. It cannot establish world novelty, patentability, market size, expert acceptance, realized value, or absence of closer prior art in patents, proprietary product behavior, paywalled literature, or unindexed implementations."}