{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_mechanism_context_external20_20260804","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_external_scrutiny_20260804","cell_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__earth_sciences","opaque_id":"layer_decay_and_expiration_management__earth_sciences__A","search_lanes":{"direct_problem":{"queries":["geological drill core repository retention deaccession policy storage capacity","geological specimen repository storage backlog curation capacity","drill core repositories storage capacity survey curation backlog research"],"source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4","SRC7","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"closest_prior_art":{"queries":["geoscience sample repository collection management deaccession core cuttings guidelines","drill core library disposal retention policy samples","geological sample lifecycle management deaccession quarantine review"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5"],"no_result_note":null},"historical_terminology":{"queries":["geological collections weeding specimens disposal historical museum policy","drill core rationalisation collection storage disposal","USGS marine sediment archive deaccession annual review"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_standards":{"queries":["geological core repository retention disposal standard policy","geological repository collection triage retention access tier offsite storage","drill core and materials storage facility policy"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"non_english_regional":{"queries":["Bohrkernlager Aussonderung Bohrkerne Aufbewahrung Richtlinie","testigos de sondeo archivo descarte conservación repositorio geológico normativa","carothèque élimination carottes conservation politique géologie","岩石 コア 試料 保管 廃棄 地質 リポジトリ"],"source_ids":["SRC4","SRC6"],"no_result_note":null},"composition_subproblems":{"queries":["geological sample inventory metadata duplication holds retention transfer disposal","geological repository annual review deaccession waiting period alternate storage audit records","drill core representative retention photograph notification hazardous disposal","geological collection lifecycle accession metadata capacity transfer destruction approvals"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","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":["USGS developed common practices for identifying, evaluating, retaining, accessing, storing, transferring, and disposing of geologic samples.","The plan specifies metadata for both new and older collections and supplies protocols, templates, a policy manual, a repository handbook, and disposition forms.","Repository-specific adaptation is expressly contemplated, making this close operational prior art rather than a merely conceptual analogy."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"Archival Policies and Collections Database for the Woods Hole Science Center's Marine Sediment Samples—Deaccession & Disposal","url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1187/htmldocs/dispose.htm","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","date_or_year":"2006","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The archive requires annual review, uses a seven-year age threshold only to identify candidates, and separately evaluates condition, documentation, storage limits, and duplication.","A curator and collections committee review candidates, a chief scientist grants final approval, and public notice is followed by a one-month waiting period.","Transfer to alternate storage is considered before disposal; hazardous samples require safety review; recommendations and disposition actions are retained permanently and reported annually."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"Deaccessioning materials","url":"https://www.bgs.ac.uk/geological-data/national-geological-repository/ngr-deaccessioning-materials/","publisher":"British Geological Survey","date_or_year":"undated; accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["The repository holds 600 km of core and more than 16 million specimens while regularly receiving new material, making capacity an ongoing management concern.","Collection rationalisation and formal deaccession are used in practice, especially for surplus or scientifically degraded material.","Relocation to organizations with academic, scientific, or educational benefit is preferred before wider disposal."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"Drill Core and Materials Storage Facility Policy","url":"https://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/en/pdf/Minerals-Minerales/Drill_Core_MFS_Policy-e.pdf","publisher":"Government of New Brunswick, Department of Natural Resources","date_or_year":"2004","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The policy states that existing facilities were essentially full and explicitly balances scientific value against storage expense.","It establishes cataloging, storage priorities, representative retention, review by a regional geologist, documentation, notification, and environmentally responsible handling of hazardous core.","Mining-law provisions restrict destruction without permission, and named core managers, directors, designated officials, and the regional geologist provide identifiable authority."]},{"source_id":"SRC5","title":"Geological Collections Management Policy","url":"https://www.ga.gov.au/data-pubs/nmfc/Geoscience-Australia-Geological-Collection-Management-Policy_2026-2031.PDF","publisher":"Geoscience Australia","date_or_year":"2026","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Geoscience Australia defines a collection-management lifecycle from acquisition through disposal and assigns clear custodial responsibilities.","The policy requires registration and minimum metadata, considers storage capacity at acquisition, maintains inventory and access, and permits formal transfer, sale, or destruction with approvals.","Removal criteria include irretrievable metadata gaps, redundancy, degradation, and unmanageable safety risk; legislation and government directions override the policy."]},{"source_id":"SRC6","title":"地質・土質調査ボーリングコア等取扱要領（案） [Guidelines for Handling Geological and Geotechnical Investigation Boring Cores]","url":"https://www1.pref.shimane.lg.jp/infra/kouji/kouji_info/kyoutuu_shiyousho/index.data/boringu_koa_youryou.pdf","publisher":"Shimane Prefecture, Departments of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and Civil Engineering","date_or_year":"2024","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"Japanese","claims_supported":["The regional Japanese guidance assigns retention periods by infrastructure type and allows the commissioning authority to make case-specific decisions.","It requires a core register recording storage location, retention period, and planned disposal year, plus accessible storage and administrative handover.","It specifies authority and contractor roles, disposal pathways, waste classification, manifest documentation, and register updates after disposal."]},{"source_id":"SRC7","title":"Why do we store geological core?","url":"https://www.bgs.ac.uk/news/why-do-we-store-geological-core/","publisher":"British Geological Survey","date_or_year":"2025","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["Physical space is constrained, not every offered specimen can be retained, and selection or rare disposal occurs based on geological value, abundance, and deterioration.","Old core acquires new uses as analytical techniques and societal questions change; digitization does not preserve every future analytical possibility.","Some core is unique and irreplaceable, so recent use or a digital surrogate cannot safely establish dispensability."]},{"source_id":"SRC8","title":"Physical Sample Preservation and Curation","url":"https://www.usgs.gov/programs/national-geological-and-geophysical-data-preservation-program/physical-sample-preservation","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey, National Geological and Geophysical Data Preservation Program","date_or_year":"undated; accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Scientific and commercial value can increase with later knowledge, while degradation and loss of documentation reduce value.","Repositories operate under logistical and financial constraints; some retain core in non-ideal, hard-to-access storage.","Current practices include identifiers, location tracking, photography, relocation controls, access governance, sample transfer, and space-saving consolidation by splitting core."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Capacity pressure and curation constraints are documented directly: New Brunswick reported essentially full facilities, BGS treats capacity as an ongoing concern while accepting new material, and USGS describes constrained repositories retaining holdings in non-ideal and difficult-to-access storage. The competing risk is also supported because physical samples can be unique, metadata loss can destroy their scientific utility, and later techniques or questions can create unforeseen value.","source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4","SRC7","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"The sources establish the problem across multiple repositories but do not prove that every repository accumulates faster than it curates, nor do they quantify the proposal's exact retrieval or accessioning effects at the intended pilot site."},"adopter_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Repository curators and governing officials are identifiable authorizers. Existing policies name curators, collections committees, chief scientists, regional geologists, designated officials, core managers, division directors, managing business areas, and chief executives as decision makers.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6"],"uncertainty":"The specific local board membership and division of legal, scientific, and operational authority would still need confirmation before a pilot."},"implementation_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Operational analogues implement most of the package: inventories and metadata, periodic review, age-based review triggers that do not alone dispose of samples, value/condition/duplication criteria, representative retention, transfer before destruction, approval chains, notice or waiting periods, safety review, permanent disposition records, and periodic reporting. The exact aisle-level shadow comparison and its proposed metric bundle were not found.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"Public policies show authorized practice but provide limited outcome data on retrieval time, false-expiry rates, staff burden, or capacity gains."},"prior_art":{"disposition":"ESTABLISHED_PRACTICE","closest_analogues":[{"name":"USGS Geologic Collections Management System","source_ids":["SRC1"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"A geologic-sample collection plan covering identification, metadata, evaluation, access, storage, retention, transfer, and disposal through standard protocols and forms.","remaining_difference":"The proposal adds an explicitly no-destruction, aisle-bounded shadow evaluation with predefined comparative operational metrics."},{"name":"Woods Hole marine-sediment archive deaccession workflow","source_ids":["SRC2"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Annual review, an age eligibility trigger, condition and duplication checks, committee and executive approval, notice, a waiting period, alternate storage, safety review, permanent records, and annual revalidation/reporting closely reproduce the gated lifecycle mechanism.","remaining_difference":"It does not describe the proposal's hot/warm/cold labels, explicit dependency task tests, or controlled shadow-pilot evaluation."},{"name":"New Brunswick Drill Core and Materials Storage Facility Policy","source_ids":["SRC4"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Responds directly to full storage by cataloging material, retaining representative evidence, requiring expert review and legal permission, notifying rights holders, documenting candidates, and controlling hazardous disposal.","remaining_difference":"It is a standing disposition policy rather than a reversible comparative shadow pilot and can authorize actual disposal."},{"name":"Geoscience Australia collection-management lifecycle","source_ids":["SRC5"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"A formal lifecycle from accession through disposal with metadata, capacity criteria, inventory, access, transfer, destruction, approvals, safety, legislation, and policy review.","remaining_difference":"The high-level public policy does not expose the detailed scoring rubric, quarantine window, retrieval experiment, or local causal evaluation proposed here."}],"contrastive_claim_remaining":"At a specified repository, a 90-day, one-aisle, no-destruction shadow workflow that jointly reconciles identity, checks holds and recorded dependencies, assigns retention/access tiers, and tests representative retrieval and reconstruction tasks will reduce retrieval time or increase projected usable capacity relative to ordinary case-by-case practice without disproportionate staff effort or material false-expiry classifications.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"Falsify the incremental claim if the frozen-aisle comparison yields no meaningful retrieval or projected-capacity improvement, causes material retrieval delay, requires disproportionate curator time, or produces false-expiry classifications after identity, provenance, dependency, and hold checks.","confidence":"HIGH","search_limitations":"This was a bounded public-web search across English and German, Spanish, French, and Japanese terminology. It cannot exhaust unpublished repository SOPs, internal collection databases, historical paper manuals, proprietary commercial core-store practices, or jurisdiction-specific legal duties. Policy publication does not establish compliance frequency or effectiveness."},"researchability_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Independent official sources directly document full or constrained storage, continuing inflow, non-ideal storage, metadata and degradation risks, and the need to preserve irreplaceable evidence.","source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4","SRC7","SRC8"]},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Existing policies identify curators, committees, chief scientists, regional geologists, designated officials, repository managers, directors, and chief executives with relevant authority.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Although the substantive lifecycle package is established practice, the bounded no-destruction shadow implementation with joint dependency checks, task-based retrieval tests, and predefined comparative metrics remains a distinct, falsifiable local-effectiveness claim.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC5"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A frozen one-aisle roster, 90-day duration, prohibition on destruction, specified observations, baseline comparison, and explicit halt criteria form a bounded and reversible next step.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC5"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A classification-only pilot can proceed without consuming or destroying specimens if repository approval is obtained. Existing policies show how holds, legal permissions, scientific review, safety officers, hazardous material controls, and disposal authority must govern any later action.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6"]},"adequate_search_evidence":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"All six required lanes were searched adversarially, including older terms, official policies and practices, multiple jurisdictions, Japanese terminology, and combinations of inventory, metadata, review, tiering, transfer, approval, waiting-period, safety, and audit components. Eight opened direct sources from five independent public publishers were retained.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"]}},"strict_success":false,"screen_survival":false,"remaining_research_value":"MODERATE","recommended_next_step":"Treat the proposal as a local implementation-effectiveness study, not a new repository-management mechanism. With repository and legal-custodian approval, preregister the 90-day no-destruction aisle pilot, define minimum meaningful changes in retrieval time and projected usable capacity, record curator hours and false-expiry adjudications, and compare results with the frozen baseline before considering any physical move or disposition.","world_novelty_boundary":"The bounded search finds the core problem–intervention package already established in public geologic-repository policy and practice. It does not establish world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, policy compliance, routine effectiveness, or realized impact; the only defensible remaining claim is the falsifiable local performance of the specified shadow-pilot configuration."}