{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp09_archetype_breadth150_20260804","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp09_light_prior_art_20260804","cell_id":"substrate_lineage_risk_audit__accounting_auditing","search_lanes":{"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"queries":["audit workpaper roll forward prior year copied assumptions current year review","rolled-forward audit file inherited judgments provenance review","audit prepopulated workpapers risk assessment accuracy"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"queries":["audit SALY same as last year risk assessment workpapers","continuing audit permanent file prior year working papers review","workpaper default effects prior-year assessments"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_and_standards":{"queries":["PCAOB AS 2110 past audits relevant reliable","audit software engagement rollforward affirm prior period information","audit risk assessment limited roll-forward options"],"source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null},"component_combination":{"queries":["audit roll forward risk ratings sampling settings account mappings review","prepopulated workpapers changed risks default effect","audit rollforward unchanged information affirmation diagnostics version comparison"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","title":"Mitigating Workpaper Default Effects that Impair Auditors’ Risk Assessment Accuracy","publisher":"University of Georgia Terry College of Business","url":"https://www.terry.uga.edu/wp-content/uploads/majors-tracie-mitigating-workpaper-default-effects-that-impair-auditors-risk-assessment-accuracy.pdf","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","claims_supported":["A controlled experiment with 111 audit staff found that prepopulated prior-year risk ratings reduced accuracy in identifying changed risks relative to non-prepopulated workpapers.","The authors attribute default persistence to implicit endorsement, reduced anticipated regret, and lower cognitive effort.","A task-specific intervention attenuated the prepopulation effect, supporting the feasibility of testing interventions against rolled-forward defaults.","The study concerns risk ratings and audit staff in an experimental task, so it does not establish effects across all artifact types, reviewer levels, or live engagements."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"AS 2110: Identifying and Assessing Risks of Material Misstatement","publisher":"Public Company Accounting Oversight Board","url":"https://pcaobus.org/oversight/standards/auditing-standards/details/AS2110","source_type":"OFFICIAL_STANDARD","claims_supported":["Auditors must evaluate whether significant changes from prior periods affect risks of material misstatement.","Knowledge from past audits should be incorporated into subsequent risk assessment.","When past-audit information is used to limit current risk-assessment procedures, its continuing relevance and reliability must be evaluated.","Risk assessments must be revised when audit evidence contradicts their original basis."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"Audit smarter by reassessing audit risk","publisher":"Journal of Accountancy","url":"https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2024/jul/audit-smarter-by-reassessing-audit-risk/","source_type":"TRADE_PROFESSIONAL","claims_supported":["Blanket technological roll-forward of planning and risk-assessment workpapers can produce a same-as-last-year result.","The article identifies possible underauditing of new risks and overauditing of areas no longer relevant.","It recommends more limited roll-forward practices and stronger current-period risk reassessment."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"Engagement rollforward best practices","publisher":"Thomson Reuters","url":"https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/help/smart-single-audit/planning/engagement-rollforward-best-practices","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["Commercial engagement software rolls prior-period information and workpapers into a new engagement.","Rolled-forward information is highlighted until edited or affirmed, and diagnostics can identify responses not affirmed.","The product flags changed procedure steps and permits version comparison, providing adjacent current-validation and baseline-diff functionality."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"The inheritance channel and core behavioral hazard are visible. Primary experimental evidence shows that prepopulated prior-year risk ratings can anchor staff auditors and impair recognition of changed risks; professional guidance reports that blanket roll-forward technology fosters same-as-last-year behavior; and PCAOB requirements recognize that past-audit information can cease to be relevant or reliable. The retained evidence does not establish the proposal’s broader prevalence claims for mappings, exclusions, sampling parameters, adjustment dispositions, missing multi-year provenance, or reviewer attention across live engagements.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"Prepopulation-default intervention for audit risk ratings","source_ids":["SRC1"],"overlap":"Directly identifies a causal problem in copied prior-year judgments and tests a current-period intervention intended to reduce inappropriate persistence when risks change.","remaining_difference":"The tested intervention communicates a priority for directionally accurate risk ratings; it does not reconstruct multi-year origin conditions, map propagation into procedures, maintain a latent-condition register, or impose a partner disposition gate."},{"name":"PCAOB past-audit relevance and reliability reassessment","source_ids":["SRC2"],"overlap":"Requires auditors to consider prior-period changes, evaluate past-audit information before relying on it, and revise risk assessments when their evidential basis is contradicted.","remaining_difference":"The standard states outcome and process requirements but does not prescribe element-level lineage records, concentration mapping, refresh triggers, or a separate release gate for inherited judgments."},{"name":"Smart Single Audit rollforward affirmation and change comparison","source_ids":["SRC4"],"overlap":"Makes inherited information visible, requires editing or affirmation, reports unaffirmed responses, flags changed procedure steps, and supports version comparison.","remaining_difference":"The cited workflow does not trace an item through successive source files to its originating rationale and evidence, test current origin conditions, map downstream decision effects, or require risk-based partner disposition. Its Affirm All option may also permit bulk reauthorization rather than element-level challenge."},{"name":"Limited roll-forward and reimagined risk assessment practice","source_ids":["SRC3"],"overlap":"Recognizes blanket roll-forward as a source of same-as-last-year behavior and recommends limiting inherited planning content while reassessing current risks.","remaining_difference":"It changes what is carried forward and emphasizes renewed risk assessment, rather than auditing the lineage and propagation of each retained risk-bearing artifact."}],"prior_art_disposition":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","contrastive_claim_remaining":"Compared with current risk reassessment, task-specific anti-default instructions, limited roll-forward, and software affirmation/change flags, tracing each risk-bearing inherited element to its originating rationale and conditions, mapping its downstream effects, and requiring a partner disposition will reproducibly identify additional consequential stale or unsupported judgments and alter validation, containment, replacement, ownership, or escalation decisions.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The contrastive claim is falsified if baseline review already provides recoverable origin rationale and documented current reauthorization for every sampled material inherited element, or if blinded comparison finds no reproducible incremental discrepancy or decision change from lineage review beyond ordinary reassessment, affirmation, diagnostics, and version comparison.","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The search covered direct descriptions, SALY and other historical terminology, standards, professional practice, product workflows, behavioral research, and component combinations. Exactly four opened sources from four publishers were retained, including primary research, an official standard, and a first-party product source.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Primary research directly supports a prepopulated-workpaper default effect for changing risk ratings, while the standard, professional article, and product workflow corroborate the need and practical setting for current-period reconsideration. Broader artifact and prevalence claims remain only partly supported.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"distinct_testable_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The remaining claim concerns incremental detection and decision impact from origin-condition and propagation tracing plus a partner gate, features not found together in the retained prior art and measurable against existing reassessment and affirmation workflows.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"]},"bounded_next_test":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A read-only pilot on one significant account, capped at 20 behavior-affecting elements with five independently classified by a second reviewer, can measure tracing time, agreement, unresolved provenance, and incremental dispositions without changing audit coverage. The experimental evidence supports comparison of workpaper interventions, while the product workflow supplies a concrete baseline.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC4"]},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"No obvious stop applies if the pilot remains read-only, stays within authorized engagement files, preserves documentation integrity and confidentiality, makes no inference that missing provenance proves misstatement, and leaves all procedure, reliance, and residual-risk decisions to the engagement partner. Access, integrity, independence, confidentiality, or reporting-deadline conflicts are halt conditions.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4"]}},"screen_survival":true,"world_novelty_boundary":"This bounded four-source public-web screen found close adjacent behavioral research, standards, professional guidance, and product controls, but no retained source describing the proposal’s full lineage-plus-propagation-plus-partner-gate combination. It cannot establish world novelty, patentability, market size, expert acceptance, implementation feasibility at scale, or realized audit value."}