{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_mechanism_context_external20_20260804","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_external_scrutiny_20260804","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics","opaque_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__C","search_lanes":{"direct_problem":{"queries":["museum loans tiered risk assessment streamlined loan process stored collections access","museum loan barriers requirements smaller museums research report stored collections loans","museum outgoing loans audit rejected requests randomized trial streamlined clearance"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"no_result_note":null},"closest_prior_art":{"queries":["museum lending schemes stored collections smaller museums loans program streamlined","museum loans risk managed approach Bizot Green Protocol loan standards","collection mobility museum lending barriers Europe loan fees insurance indemnity"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC6"],"no_result_note":null},"historical_terminology":{"queries":["\"Simple Loans\" museum stored collections long loans risk","museum loan network stored works extended loans","collection mobility museum lending borrowing insurance indemnity"],"source_ids":["SRC3","SRC5","SRC6"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_standards":{"queries":["museum loan standards risk assessment borrower facilities report insurance conservation","museum object lending risk-based approach low risk loan","art loan agreement streamlined review template pooled insurance training smaller venues evaluation"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC6","SRC7"],"no_result_note":null},"non_english_regional":{"queries":["musées prêts œuvres exigences proportionnées risque conservation réserves accès collections","préstamos museos requisitos conservación evaluación riesgos colecciones almacenadas acceso","Museumsleihverkehr risikobasiert Leihgaben Anforderungen Klima kleinere Museen","museale lån risikovurdering forenkle låneavtaler samlinger magasin"],"source_ids":["SRC6","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"composition_subproblems":{"queries":["museum loan process pilot randomized evaluation risk based clearance total staff time cost","museum collections stored works demand matching loan network risk tier insurance condition reporting","museum outgoing loans audit rejected requests randomized trial streamlined clearance condition reports"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"],"no_result_note":"No retained source combined a preregistered causal audit of failed work–venue matches, randomized assignment to a low-risk clearance lane, full incidence accounting, and twelve-month noninferiority and rollback rules."}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","title":"Accessible Loans Program","url":"https://kifutures.com/programs/accessible-loans/","publisher":"Ki Futures","date_or_year":"2026","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["An operating program identifies restrictive and outdated loan requirements as barriers to collection sharing, especially for smaller and rural museums.","The program investigates current documentation and actual collection needs, then updates agreements, workflows, templates, climate requirements, condition reporting, and risk-management tools.","This closely matches the proposed proportionate, professionally tailored clearance lever, although it does not report the proposed randomized evaluation."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"Lending and Borrowing Today: 2025 Review","url":"https://theexhibitionsgroup.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Lending-and-Borrowing-Today-2025-Review_Final-Report_compressed.pdf","publisher":"The Exhibitions Group and National Museum Directors' Council","date_or_year":"2026","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","language":"English","claims_supported":["A survey of 47 UK sector organizations found capacity and rising costs continue to constrain lending and borrowing.","Borrowers reported strict environmental requirements without clear rationales and requirements exceeding some lenders' own in-house standards.","Sixty-eight percent of surveyed organizations reported a risk-managed approach to each loan and 83 percent reported pragmatic flexibility where possible, showing that the core intervention is already common practice.","Only 13 percent believed the existing principles had increased lending and borrowing, while 73 percent were unsure, leaving value in stronger causal evaluation."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"Simple Loans Administration","url":"https://archive-media.museumsassociation.org/simpleloansadministration_firstedition.pdf","publisher":"Museums Association","date_or_year":"2007","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The guidance was produced to increase long loans from stored museum collections.","It states that belt-and-braces agreements can be so onerous that borrowers cannot accept objects and may demand standards exceeding those in the lender's own store.","It recommends varying requirements by object and venue, using simple cost-effective agreements, avoiding unnecessary couriers and commercial transport, and preferring indemnity or considering non-insurance where appropriate.","It preserves condition reporting, professional care, rights provisions, written authorization, inspection, recall, and additional object-specific safeguards."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"Bizot Green Protocol","url":"https://www.cimam.org/sustainability-and-ecology-museum-practice/bizot-green-protocol/","publisher":"CIMAM – International Committee for Museums and Collections of Modern Art","date_or_year":"2023","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The protocol recommends replacing blanket environmental conditions with parameters tailored to individual objects or object groups.","It explicitly advocates risk management instead of avoiding minor risks at large financial and environmental cost.","It retains conservator evaluation and tighter requirements for sensitive objects, demonstrating compatibility between proportionality and professional safeguards."]},{"source_id":"SRC5","title":"Museum loan program to be based at MIT","url":"https://news.mit.edu/1995/museum-1018","publisher":"Massachusetts Institute of Technology","date_or_year":"1995","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["The Museum Loan Network was created to make stored works available through extended inter-museum loans.","A feasibility study found strong interest among potential lenders and borrowers, supporting the existence of stored supply and venue demand.","The program sought participation across museums of different sizes and missions, establishing a historical analogue for collection sharing rather than the proposal's evaluation design."]},{"source_id":"SRC6","title":"Practical Ways to Reduce the Cost of Lending and Borrowing of Cultural Objects Among Member States of the European Union","url":"https://uk.icom.museum/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Lending-For-Europe_Toolkit.pdf","publisher":"Open Method of Coordination Working Group of EU Member States' Experts on the Mobility of Collections","date_or_year":"2012","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The EU expert toolkit addresses excessive insurance, transport, valuation, and risk-assessment costs that impede collection mobility.","It recommends simplified and improved risk assessment, state indemnity, shared liability, and less expensive transport while maintaining strong security inspection and object care.","It warns that over-elaborate conditions can prevent agreements and says comparable quality standards need not be identical.","Its recommendations closely anticipate proportionate coverage and risk requirements but do not include the proposed audit and randomized trial."]},{"source_id":"SRC7","title":"Guidelines for Reviewing a Borrower's Facility Report","url":"https://exhibitonsandloans.hsites.harvard.edu/guidelines-reviewing-borrowers-facility-report","publisher":"Harvard Library, Exhibitions and Loans","date_or_year":"2026","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Facility reports are used to assess borrower suitability and minimize risk using building, fire, security, environment, handling, insurance, staffing, and loan-history information.","The guidance directs reviewers to assess overall risk and identifies non-negotiable deficiencies such as absent fire protection, security, climate control, or coverage.","It supports the proposal's professional classification variables and the need to preserve safety vetoes."]},{"source_id":"SRC8","title":"Política de colecciones: Museos del Ministerio de Cultura","url":"https://www.museonacional.gov.co/colecciones/Documents/POL%C3%8DTICA%20DE%20COLECCIONES%20Museos%20Ministerio%20FINAL31%201%2017.pdf","publisher":"Museo Nacional de Colombia and Ministerio de Cultura","date_or_year":"2017","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"Spanish","claims_supported":["The regional policy permits loans for cultural, educational, or academic projects after facility, conservation, registration, and curatorial review.","It requires written agreements covering copyright, condition reports, insurance, trained handling, and documented reasons for refusal.","It identifies the museum director and relevant curator as loan authorizers and preserves special treatment for archaeological, ethnographic, ritual, and provenance-sensitive material."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"Independent evidence supports the general wedge: stored works and borrowing demand exist, and loan capacity, cost, insurance, environmental, security, transport, and administrative requirements sometimes restrict loans unnecessarily. The strongest survey also reports variation driven by institutional policies rather than individual object needs. Public evidence does not establish the proposal's required minimum count or share of professionally displayable, legally loanable failed matches causally attributable to disproportionate requirements at any specific adopter.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC5","SRC6"],"uncertainty":"Program claims and a 47-organization UK survey do not provide a representative global prevalence estimate, request-level causal coding, or the proposal's qualified-work and qualified-venue denominator."},"adopter_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Museum leadership is an identifiable authorizer, with registrars, conservators, curators, counsel, insurers, rights holders, and applicable community authorities controlling specialized decisions or vetoes. Public policies specifically assign approval to directors and curators, while operating programs recruit museums as implementers.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC7","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"Actual authority varies with ownership, governing law, donor terms, provenance, insurance arrangements, and cultural or source-community rights; institution-specific verification remains necessary."},"implementation_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"Substantial implementation infrastructure already exists: risk-managed case review, tailored environmental requirements, simplified agreements, template documentation, indemnity or shared-liability alternatives, training, digital condition reporting, and professional vetoes. No retained source implemented the complete proposed sequence of a preregistered failed-match audit followed by stratified random assignment, full burden and incidence measurement, twelve-month noninferiority monitoring, and automatic rollback.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"The operating Accessible Loans Program reports intended outputs rather than controlled outcome estimates, and the UK survey is anonymous, self-reported, and not designed to estimate causal effects or rare harms."},"prior_art":{"disposition":"ESTABLISHED_PRACTICE","closest_analogues":[{"name":"Ki Futures Accessible Loans Program","source_ids":["SRC1"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Investigates restrictive loan documentation and actual collection needs, then tailors agreements, workflows, climate requirements, training, condition reporting, and risk tools to make lending safer, easier, and more equitable.","remaining_difference":"The retained description does not preregister a failed-match threshold, randomize eligible requests, measure full affected-party incidence, or specify the proposal's noninferiority and rollback design."},{"name":"Lending and Borrowing Principles and their 2025 sector review","source_ids":["SRC2"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Promotes pragmatic risk-managed requirements, fewer unnecessary couriers, cost transparency, and partnership; 68 percent of respondents reported per-request risk management and 83 percent pragmatic flexibility.","remaining_difference":"The review assesses self-reported adoption rather than auditing request-level causal reasons or experimentally estimating effects on completion, time, burden, harm, rights, and equity."},{"name":"Simple Loans Administration and Effective Collections","source_ids":["SRC3"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Targets long loans from stored collections and explicitly replaces onerous, inflexible documentation with object- and venue-specific, cost-effective terms while retaining professional safeguards.","remaining_difference":"It provides operational guidance rather than the proposal's causal audit, randomized trial, distributional accounting, and preregistered stopping thresholds."},{"name":"EU collection-mobility risk, indemnity, and shared-liability toolkit","source_ids":["SRC6"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Seeks to remove excessive insurance, valuation, transport, and risk-assessment costs through simplified assessment and proportionate risk allocation without abandoning security and conservation.","remaining_difference":"It is primarily cross-border policy guidance and does not focus on an audited pool of stored artworks or experimentally compare a specified low-risk lane with standard review."},{"name":"Bizot Green Protocol","source_ids":["SRC4"],"same_problem":false,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Rejects blanket environmental conditions in favor of professional, object-specific risk assessment and proportionality.","remaining_difference":"Its primary objective is sustainable environmental management, not proving failed physical-loan matches or testing completed-loan and equity outcomes."},{"name":"Museum Loan Network","source_ids":["SRC5"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":false,"overlap":"Matches stored art with museums seeking extended loans and documents historical lender and borrower interest.","remaining_difference":"It addresses discovery and inter-museum coordination rather than disproportionate clearance requirements or risk-tiered processing."}],"contrastive_claim_remaining":"For requests that independently pass all conservation, provenance, rights, cultural, security, coverage, and venue-qualification screens, a preregistered low-risk clearance lane may causally increase completed loans or shorten decisions within ninety days while remaining noninferior over twelve months on total labor and cost, condition change, incidents, rights compliance, and equitable venue participation. The audit-first causal threshold, randomized evaluation, full incidence accounting, and automatic rollback are the credible incremental research package.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The claim fails if the preregistered audit finds too few eligible failed matches caused by disproportionate requirements; or, among eligible randomized requests, the lane does not improve completion or decision time within ninety days; or any twelve-month noninferiority margin is exceeded for total burden, condition change, incidents, coverage, rights or cultural compliance, or equitable participation.","confidence":"HIGH","search_limitations":"This bounded search used eight opened public sources across six adversarial lanes and multiple regions. It did not exhaust paywalled literature, internal museum loan files, unpublished program evaluations, every language or jurisdiction, or institution-specific contracts. Search results cannot establish world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, or realized impact."},"researchability_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Multiple independent sources, including a primary sector survey, operating program, historical network, and professional guidance, support the existence of stored supply, borrowing demand, and avoidable administrative, cost, insurance, and environmental barriers. The institution-specific magnitude remains appropriately assigned to the proposed audit.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC5","SRC6"]},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Legally empowered museum leadership can authorize an audit or bounded process trial, while public policies identify directors and curators and preserve specialist review and veto authority.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC7","SRC8"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Although risk-managed and proportionate loan practice is established, the combination of a causal failed-match audit, stratified randomization, completion and time outcomes, full burden and equity accounting, twelve-month noninferiority tests, and automatic rollback remains distinct and falsifiable in the retained evidence.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC6"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A fixed-window retrospective audit with predefined eligibility, reason codes, materiality thresholds, staff hours, costs, and legitimate restrictions is bounded and reversible. Only if it passes would up to forty screened requests enter the capped randomized trial.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC7","SRC8"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The authorized first step is records-based, and the proposed trial preserves conservation, provenance, rights, cultural, security, insurance, and professional vetoes. Public guidance shows these controls and identifiable approval structures are compatible with tailored requirements. Rare harm cannot be ruled out, but it is a monitoring and statistical-design issue rather than an unresolved categorical stop.","source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"]},"adequate_search_evidence":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The search covered the direct problem, closest prior art, historical terminology, products and standards, non-English and regional terminology, and combinations of audit, risk classification, insurance, documentation, matching, and randomized evaluation. Exactly eight opened direct sources were retained, spanning eight publisher groupings and seven primary, official, or first-party sources.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"]}},"strict_success":false,"screen_survival":false,"remaining_research_value":"MODERATE","recommended_next_step":"Do not treat risk-tiered loan clearance as a novel practice. First preregister and conduct the fixed-window audit, explicitly crosswalking current institutional practice against Ki Futures, the UK lending principles, Simple Loans, Bizot, and EU indemnity and shared-liability guidance. Proceed to the capped randomized evaluation only if the audit's eligible failed-match threshold is met and institution-specific legal, cultural, insurance, conservation, staffing, power, and sample-size reviews confirm authority and adequate monitoring. Treat rare serious harm descriptively and with immediate stopping rules because forty requests cannot establish safety rates.","world_novelty_boundary":"The bounded search indicates that the core problem–intervention package—reducing restrictive museum-loan barriers through professional, object-specific risk management, simpler agreements, pragmatic environmental requirements, and proportionate insurance or liability—is established practice. The narrower audit-first randomized evaluation and its incidence, noninferiority, and rollback framework were not found in the retained sources. That search contrast is not a claim of world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, or realized impact."}