{"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__earth_sciences","opaque_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__earth_sciences__A","search_lanes":{"direct_problem":{"queries":["geological core repository access policy sampling request fees USGS CRC","geological core repositories access barriers researchers study sample archive reuse drilling cost","drill core library user access demand backlog waiting time repository"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5"],"no_result_note":null},"closest_prior_art":{"queries":["drill core repository access policy non-destructive analysis destructive sampling approval","geological core library sampling request reservation policy","core repository sampling application approval turnaround time geological"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5"],"no_result_note":null},"historical_terminology":{"queries":["geological survey core library loan examination sampling policy archive","lithothèque carothèque prêt consultation échantillonnage carottes géologiques","Projet géothèque de référence carothèque BRGM"],"source_ids":["SRC6","SRC7"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_standards":{"queries":["geological sample repository standard best practice access sampling archive guidelines","USGS geologic collections management system access standard practices","core library fee schedule sample retrieval handling charges"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6"],"no_result_note":null},"non_english_regional":{"queries":["carothèque géologique accès prélèvement carottes règlement consultation frais","Bohrkernarchiv Zugang Probenahme Richtlinie Gebühren","lithothèque carottes forage consultation échantillonnage BRGM","Australia drill core library access sampling request policy"],"source_ids":["SRC4","SRC7"],"no_result_note":null},"composition_subproblems":{"queries":["core repository non destructive scanning fast track access","drill core reservation expiry sampling allocation","geological repository sampling fees handling cost request approval Indigenous consent","core archive imaging access booking fees destructive sampling committee"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","title":"Core Sampling Policy","url":"https://www.usgs.gov/core-research-center/core-sampling-policy","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey Core Research Center","date_or_year":"accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The repository applies material-availability thresholds, per-visit and outstanding-sample limits, minimum-retained-core rules, and case-by-case scientific justification.","Non-destructive on-site analysis is permitted with repository approval, while off-site non-destructive work requires director approval and a return deadline.","Users with overdue analytical results cannot obtain further viewing or sampling access."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"Accessing the NGR material collections","url":"https://www.bgs.ac.uk/geological-data/national-geological-repository/accessing-ngr-material-collections/","publisher":"British Geological Survey","date_or_year":"charges effective 2026-04-01","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["BGS uses an application and booking process and publishes staff-time, laboratory, retrieval, sampling, photography, and 3D-scanning charges.","Charges are described as covering staff time or cost recovery, with academic waivers for qualifying unfunded users.","Loans expire, can be extended annually only to five years, and overdue specimens can bar later visits or loans.","Sampling frequency restrictions may be relaxed when significant scientific justification is agreed."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"Access Data and Samples","url":"https://www.iodp.org/resources/access-data-and-samples","publisher":"International Ocean Discovery Program","date_or_year":"accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Physical core requests use a dedicated request database and are governed by a sample, data, and obligations policy.","A Curatorial Advisory Board makes final sample-distribution decisions.","Post-moratorium data are discoverable while some proprietary holds are strictly maintained, demonstrating time-dependent access restrictions and formal allocation authority."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"Access the drill core library","url":"https://nt.gov.au/industry/geoscience/accessing-the-drill-core-library","publisher":"Northern Territory Government of Australia","date_or_year":"2026","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Researchers may view or sample government-held core after submitting a form, arranging an appointment, and obtaining sampling approval.","Destructive sampling is allowed only where sufficient material remains and similar analysis has not recently been completed.","Analytical methods and raw results must be returned on fixed deadlines, supporting differentiated controls based on consumption and duplication risk."]},{"source_id":"SRC5","title":"About the KGS Drill Core Library","url":"https://kgs.ku.edu/core-library","publisher":"Kansas Geological Survey, University of Kansas","date_or_year":"policy effective 2023-01-17; accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["Off-site storage requires at least three business days' notice, and sampling is decided case by case.","The library publishes differentiated retrieval, labor, slabbing, sampling, photography, packaging, and shipping charges.","KGS may restrict material involved in an ongoing project, limits destructive removal to 25 percent of an interval, and bills late cancellations in full.","The page establishes that fees, advance requests, limited workspace, project-based holds, and destructive-use limits coexist in an operating public repository."]},{"source_id":"SRC6","title":"The U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS)—A Master Catalog and Collections Management Plan for U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Samples and Sample Collections","url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1410/","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","date_or_year":"2015","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The report was developed from a 2006 inventory and 2008 working group to coordinate collections and enable researcher access.","It supplies adaptable protocols and templates for access, storage, transfer, and disposal rather than requiring one uniform procedure.","Metadata, discovery, and standardized collections management are established alternatives or complements to changing approval and allocation rules."]},{"source_id":"SRC7","title":"Projet « Géothèque de référence » — Activité 2005, Rapport final BRGM/RP-54260-FR","url":"https://infoterre.brgm.fr/rapports/RP-54260-FR.pdf","publisher":"BRGM","date_or_year":"2005","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","language":"French","claims_supported":["The report documents older French terms including géothèque, lithothèque, and carothèque and inventories French and foreign core repositories.","Its BGS site study describes dedicated curatorial staff, public and industrial consultation, user charges funding handling labor, and scientific access financed as a public service.","It records repositories with restricted public access, confidentiality or radiological conditions and substantial cataloguing and sample-management workloads.","The report demonstrates that access, staffing, financing, safety, and preservation tradeoffs were recognized operational issues by 2005."]},{"source_id":"SRC8","title":"Earth Science Data Repositories: Implementing the CARE Principles","url":"https://datascience.codata.org/articles/10.5334/dsj-2024-037","publisher":"Data Science Journal","date_or_year":"2024","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","language":"English","claims_supported":["The peer-reviewed paper develops repository recommendations with Earth-science repositories, Indigenous-data-governance collaborators, and GIDA participants.","It expressly includes Earth observations, samples, specimens, and museum collections within potentially Indigenous-related materials.","It recommends Indigenous participation in governance, transparent access protocols, repository identification of affected materials, clarification of permitted uses, and community access to relevant samples.","The findings support treating rights-holder authority as a substantive constraint rather than removable administrative friction."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"Public repositories demonstrably impose applications, approvals, advance-notice rules, fees, project or proprietary holds, quotas, scientific-justification requirements, and material-conservation limits. Reuse is an explicit repository purpose, and low-consumption activities such as on-site non-destructive analysis and digital imaging are feasible. However, the retained evidence does not establish the proposal's decisive inefficiency: qualified low-risk requests waiting or being rejected while usable capacity or unneeded reservations remain idle. Several repositories already differentiate non-destructive access from destructive sampling, explain charges as staff-time or cost recovery, and impose expiry or compliance rules.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7"],"uncertainty":"No retained source provides request-level queue data, rejection causes, unused appointment capacity, reservation age, scanner utilization, fee-cost accounting sufficient for independent verification, or evidence of avoidable redrilling caused by access rules."},"adopter_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Identifiable operators and authorizers include USGS repository managers, BGS/NGR managers, the IODP Curatorial Advisory Board, the Northern Territory Geological Survey, and the Kansas Geological Survey. Each publicly administers relevant access or allocation rules. Where materials or associated information concern Indigenous Peoples, repository authority is insufficient by itself and the relevant Indigenous governing body or representative must participate in authorization.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"Authority over a particular holding may also remain with a depositor, titleholder, project lead, regulator, or rights holder; an archive-specific authority map is still required."},"implementation_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"A short imaging-only pilot is operationally plausible because repositories already allow non-destructive analysis, offer photography or 3D scanning, use request forms and bookings, and enforce return or compliance deadlines. Existing policies also provide measurable comparators for decision time, completion, staff workload, and protected-material outcomes. No retained source reports an implemented fast-track-plus-hold-expiry experiment or demonstrates that approval review is the binding constraint at a candidate archive.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5"],"uncertainty":"Scanner availability, retrieval labor, physical handling, safety review, confidentiality, rights review, or weak scientific demand could dominate the measured workflow."},"prior_art":{"disposition":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","closest_analogues":[{"name":"Differentiated core-access and sampling controls at USGS, BGS, NTGS, and KGS","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Operating repositories already distinguish non-destructive analysis from destructive sampling, vary scrutiny with material scarcity or scientific justification, cap consumption, publish fees, enforce advance requests, and impose expiry or compliance consequences.","remaining_difference":"The retained sources do not show a pre-registered, time-limited fast path for a narrowly defined imaging class combined with active-use confirmation and automatic release of stale project holds, distributional monitoring, and rollback."},{"name":"IODP formal sample-allocation and time-dependent access system","source_ids":["SRC3"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"IODP centralizes requests, assigns final distribution authority to a curatorial board, and uses moratoria and proprietary holds to allocate finite scientific material.","remaining_difference":"Its published page does not describe risk-tiered expedited approval, periodic hold-renewal tests, fee calibration, or a controlled comparison against standard review."},{"name":"GCMS and the French géothèque/carothèque management model","source_ids":["SRC6","SRC7"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":false,"overlap":"These sources address researcher access, cataloguing, staffing, preservation, cost allocation, confidentiality, safety, and standardized repository procedures.","remaining_difference":"They primarily strengthen repository infrastructure and management; they do not establish that coarse approval or stale reservations cause idle usable capacity or test streamlined allocation."},{"name":"CARE-aligned Earth-science repository governance","source_ids":["SRC8"],"same_problem":false,"same_causal_lever":false,"overlap":"It supplies governance, transparency, representation, acceptable-use, and community-access safeguards relevant to any access redesign.","remaining_difference":"It does not streamline core access and may require additional substantive review where Indigenous rights or interests are implicated."}],"contrastive_claim_remaining":"At one named archive where a blinded intake audit first verifies avoidable procedural delay or inactive project holds, an imaging-only fast path plus a predeclared active-use confirmation rule will reduce median decision time by at least 25 percent and increase completed eligible reuse relative to the archive's existing differentiated process, without exceeding thresholds for damage, provenance or custody breaches, rights violations, uncompensated staff workload, or access inequity. Any fee-recalibration claim remains separate and requires proof that a charge exceeds attributable stewardship cost.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The claim is falsified if the audit attributes nearly all delay to material scarcity, retrieval or imaging capacity, mandatory confidentiality or rights review, safety, or unqualified requests; if no inactive holds are safely releasable; if the pilot misses the 25 percent decision-time threshold or does not increase completion; or if any protected-outcome threshold is crossed.","confidence":"MODERATE","search_limitations":"The bounded public-web search covered six required lanes, including French and German terminology, older French repository terminology, official operating policies, products and management guidance, and combinations of approvals, fees, imaging, holds, destructive allocation, and Indigenous authority. Public pages rarely expose queue logs, rejected requests, reservation ledgers, utilization, or fee-cost models. The search cannot establish world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, or realized impact, and it did not examine every jurisdiction or private repository."},"researchability_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"FAIL","rationale":"The sources verify access rules and the value of reuse but do not verify the distinctive alleged loss: eligible low-risk requests stranded by uniform review, excessive fees, or stale reservations despite usable capacity. Existing repositories often already use tiered controls and cost-linked charges.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC7"]},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Named public and scientific repositories publish their access rules and identify curators, managers, or boards with operational authority; affected Indigenous governing bodies or representatives are identifiable required co-authorizers when relevant.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC8"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Close practice leaves a narrower falsifiable claim: whether an audit-qualified imaging fast path and active-use confirmation rule improve decision time and completion beyond existing differentiated access without worsening protected outcomes.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"One archive can conduct a blinded 6–12 month retrospective request-and-hold audit, followed only if warranted by a 90-day imaging-only pilot; destructive reallocations can remain in shadow mode and all cases can revert to standard review.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The audit is non-destructive, and a later imaging-only pilot can preserve existing custody, provenance, confidentiality, safety, depositor, and rights-holder reviews. The pilot must exclude affected material until required concurrence is documented and halt on any breach.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC8"]},"adequate_search_evidence":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"All six lanes were searched adversarially. Exactly eight retained direct sources were opened, spanning seven publishers; every retained source is primary research, official guidance, or a first-party repository practice.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"]}},"strict_success":false,"screen_survival":false,"remaining_research_value":"MODERATE","recommended_next_step":"Obtain one repository's anonymized 6–12 month request log, decision timestamps and reasons, booking utilization, project-hold or loan ledger, staff-time records, imaging capacity, and fee basis. Blindly classify each delay as mandatory protection, genuine capacity scarcity, weak eligibility, or avoidable procedure. Proceed only if enough eligible cases and inactive holds exist to power a 90-day imaging-only randomized or stepped-wedge pilot; pre-register the 25 percent latency threshold, completion, workload, distributional, zero-breach, concurrence, halt, and rollback rules.","world_novelty_boundary":"This search found established risk differentiation, curatorial allocation, fees, time-limited loans or moratoria, compliance consequences, non-destructive analysis, imaging services, and repository-governance safeguards. It did not find the exact audit-qualified imaging-fast-path-plus-active-hold-expiry pilot as a documented package. That residual contrast is a local empirical research claim, not evidence of world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, or realized impact."}