{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_mechanism_context_external20_20260804","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics","judge_id":"J2","item_assessments":[{"opaque_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__A","supported_problem":4,"external_distinctiveness":2,"testability":4,"researchability":4,"evidence_quality":4,"fatal_issue":null},{"opaque_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__C","supported_problem":4,"external_distinctiveness":4,"testability":5,"researchability":4,"evidence_quality":4,"fatal_issue":null},{"opaque_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__B","supported_problem":4,"external_distinctiveness":2,"testability":5,"researchability":4,"evidence_quality":4,"fatal_issue":null}],"pairwise_comparisons":[{"pair_id":"A_vs_C","left_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__A","right_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__C","preference":"RIGHT","confidence":"HIGH","rationale":"Both core interventions are established practices, but C retains a more distinctive audit-first randomized research package addressing an unresolved request-level causal question. A's open-reuse lever closely duplicates mature museum programs, leaving mainly a local matched evaluation."},{"pair_id":"A_vs_B","left_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__A","right_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__B","preference":"RIGHT","confidence":"MODERATE","rationale":"The proposals target essentially the same established intervention and neither has direct evidence quantifying fee-induced abandonment. B is marginally stronger because it more explicitly permits randomized matched-cluster assignment, proposes surveying interrupted applicants, and separates discovery and image-quality confounding in its falsifier."},{"pair_id":"C_vs_B","left_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__C","right_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__B","preference":"LEFT","confidence":"HIGH","rationale":"C offers the more externally distinctive and decision-relevant study: a preregistered audit can first falsify the local wedge, followed only conditionally by randomized testing with burden, equity, and noninferiority outcomes. B's underlying open-access policy is already demonstrated at major institutions, so its remaining contribution is narrower."}],"overall_top_choice":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__C","overall_rationale":"C is the strongest research candidate after scrutiny. Its substantive problem is supported but not presumed, its audit supplies a bounded early falsifier, and its conditional randomized trial directly tests whether proportionate clearance improves loans without shifting costs or weakening stewardship. The intervention itself is established and the small trial cannot estimate rare-harm rates, but these limitations are acknowledged and do not defeat the records-based first step.","blinding_limitations":"Judgment used only the supplied preserved records and external-evaluation summaries. Source claims and search completeness were not independently rechecked, scoring assumes a five-point scale, and A and B are so substantively similar that their directional comparison rests on modest differences in evaluation design rather than intervention distinctiveness."}