{"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__C","search_lanes":{"direct_problem":{"queries":["geological repository drill core sample collection deaccession policy storage space","geoscience sample repository collection management retention disposal guidelines core cuttings","geological collections storage space crisis core repositories samples","drill core repository storage capacity disposal policy collection audit"],"source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC7","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"closest_prior_art":{"queries":["geological collections management system inventory retention disposal risk assessment restore retrieval repository","geologic sample repository tiered storage active archive remote collection review","geologic sample repository \"restore\" test archived samples retrieval audit","geological specimen deaccession publication dependency provenance audit trail"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"historical_terminology":{"queries":["geoscience sample collections deaccession archival policies marine sediment samples","carothèque géologique politique conservation échantillons destruction","geological collections inventory retention disposal legacy collections","archive review prescribed storage term geologic samples deaccession"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC7","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_standards":{"queries":["museum collections deaccession quarantine audit trail geological specimens standard SPECTRUM","geological collections management standards accession deaccession documentation location audit","earth science collections collections management policy deaccession geological samples","geological collections \"quarantine\" deaccession disposal"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC8"],"no_result_note":null},"non_english_regional":{"queries":["site:brgm.fr carothèque gestion échantillons géologiques conservation élimination","carothèque géologique politique conservation échantillons destruction","archivo testigos sondeos geológicos conservación muestras descarte","Litoteca normativa acceso muestreo conservación muestras geológicas"],"source_ids":["SRC6","SRC7"],"no_result_note":null},"composition_subproblems":{"queries":["geologic sample repository \"restore\" test archived samples retrieval audit","geologic collection \"tiered storage\" sample repository","geological specimen deaccession publication dependency provenance audit trail","geological collections management system inventory retention disposal risk assessment restore retrieval repository"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC8"],"no_result_note":"No retained source described the proposal's exact combination of evidence-weighted service tiers, publication/dependency tracing, shadow assignment, and a stratified physical-retrieval-plus-lineage restore drill."}},"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 a centralized catalog, required metadata, collection-evaluation criteria, and standard practices for retention and disposal of geologic materials.","The plan supplies protocols and templates for access, storage, transfer, and disposal and is intended for active USGS geologic repositories.","A 2006 inventory and subsequent working group show that legacy-collection coordination and management were recognized institutional problems."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"Guide to Planning for and Managing Scientific Working Collections in the U.S. Geological Survey","url":"https://www.usgs.gov/scientific-collections/guide-planning-and-managing-scientific-working-collections-us-geological","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","date_or_year":"2019; updated 2025","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["USGS operates a working-collection lifecycle covering planning, acquisition, use, evaluation, and disposition, with quality tracked and documented throughout.","Existing collections without plans must be evaluated; transfer or destruction can follow consideration of condition, value, use, ownership, and governing agreements.","The guide explicitly defines legacy and orphan collections as potentially incomplete or poorly documented and requires metadata for status, lineage, contacts, dates, availability, and related publications.","Science Center Directors, collection managers, the National Museum Curator, and the Collections Steering Committee have identified responsibilities."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","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","date_or_year":"n.d.; accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Repository storage conditions and resources vary, and physical-sample integrity is a central constraint.","The USGS Core Research Center longitudinally halves core to reduce required storage space while making mating halves available for research.","Hazardous samples and sensitive location information require specialized controls, limiting indiscriminate consolidation or disclosure."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","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 has an approved collection-management lifecycle from acquisition through disposal.","The policy requires registration, minimum metadata, traceability, inventory records, formal transparent removal, approvals, and review.","Storage capacity, missing metadata, redundancy, degradation, safety, legislation, security, and regulatory obligations are explicit decision criteria.","The CEO approved the policy, with directors as policy sponsors and managing teams responsible for monitoring compliance."]},{"source_id":"SRC5","title":"Spectrum – UK Museum Collections Management Standard","url":"https://collectionstrust.org.uk/resource/spectrum/","publisher":"Collections Trust","date_or_year":"current webpage; accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_STANDARD","language":"English","claims_supported":["Spectrum treats collection management as a documented object lifecycle.","Its 21 procedures extend from object entry through deaccessioning, and primary procedures are linked to UK Museum Accreditation.","Lifecycle documentation and governed deaccession are broader established museum practices rather than concepts unique to geological repositories."]},{"source_id":"SRC6","title":"Normativa de acceso y muestreo de la Litoteca de sondeos de Peñarroya-Pueblonuevo (Córdoba)","url":"https://info.igme.es/media/Pdfs/Normativa%20de%20acceso%20y%20muestreo_marzo.pdf","publisher":"Instituto Geológico y Minero de España–Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas","date_or_year":"n.d.; accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"Spanish","claims_supported":["Spain's national borehole repository catalogs and stores subsurface cores and samples with an associated availability database.","Access and destructive sampling require approval, supervision, documentation, and return of resulting data and residual materials.","At least half of a core must remain intact, demonstrating a preservation exception against irreversible consumption.","Repository managers and the technical deputy director are identifiable authorizers."]},{"source_id":"SRC7","title":"Géothèque de référence – Activité 2005","url":"https://infoterre.brgm.fr/rapports/RP-54979-FR.pdf","publisher":"Bureau de recherches géologiques et minières","date_or_year":"2006","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","language":"French","claims_supported":["BRGM documented core boxes left in improvised storage without a settled management agreement or defined future disposition.","A storm damaged the storage roof, forcing cores outside under tarpaulins and demonstrating concrete condition and governance risks.","The report uses older regional terminology such as carothèque and géothèque and documents triage and movement among proposed regional stores."]},{"source_id":"SRC8","title":"Archival Policies and Collections Database for the Woods Hole Science Center's Marine Sediment Samples: Deaccession & Disposition","url":"https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1187/htmldocs/dispose.htm","publisher":"U.S. Geological Survey","date_or_year":"2006; webpage modified 2013","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["The repository policy requires annual review of the archive and uses a seven-year storage term to trigger deaccession eligibility review.","Condition, missing information, storage limits, and duplication are explicit disposition criteria.","A curator, principal investigator, collections committee, and chief scientist review and authorize decisions.","Public announcement and a one-month waiting period precede disposition; alternate storage or transfer is considered before destruction.","Hazardous-material disposal requires consultation with a safety officer, and disposition records are retained permanently."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"The problem exists in bounded, institution-specific form. USGS defines legacy and orphan collections as potentially incomplete or poorly documented, reports that management was formerly decentralized, and requires evaluation of inherited collections. BRGM documented unmanaged core boxes with uncertain disposition and weather exposure. Storage limitations, redundant samples, deterioration, missing metadata, and safety risks are explicit triggers in USGS and Geoscience Australia policies.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC7","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"The search did not establish prevalence across all geological repositories or quantify the proposed 'material share' of incomplete accessions. Some major repositories may already be well cataloged, appropriately retained, and economical to operate."},"adopter_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Identifiable adopters and authorizers include geological-survey repository managers, USGS Science Center Directors and collection managers, the Woods Hole curator/collections committee/Team Chief Scientist, Geoscience Australia managing directors and CEO, and IGME repository management.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC6","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"Authority varies with ownership, land-management agreements, legislation, donor restrictions, cultural obligations, and hazardous-material rules; no generic repository committee can authorize every disposition."},"implementation_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"The central package—inventory and metadata, lifecycle evaluation, differentiated retention/transfer/disposal, formal approval, waiting periods, safety review, and permanent disposition records—is implemented or prescribed in multiple official geological-collection systems. Physical consolidation by core halving is also practiced. The exact evidence-weighted tier score, dependency graph, hot/warm/cold service levels, and restore-drill combination was not found.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC8"],"uncertainty":"Published policies establish institutional adoption and authorized procedures more strongly than consistent day-to-day compliance or measured outcomes. No source reported a controlled comparison with the proposal's nearest rival."},"prior_art":{"disposition":"ESTABLISHED_PRACTICE","closest_analogues":[{"name":"USGS Woods Hole marine-sediment archive annual review and deaccession policy","source_ids":["SRC8"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Annual review, elapsed-time review trigger, condition and metadata checks, duplication and storage-capacity criteria, curator and committee authorization, public notice, a one-month waiting period, alternate storage or transfer, hazardous-material review, and permanent disposition records closely reproduce the proposed managed lifecycle and safety gates.","remaining_difference":"It does not describe evidence-weighted multi-factor scoring, explicit publication and derivative dependency graphs, active/nearline/remote service tiers, or restore drills."},{"name":"USGS GCMS and Working Scientific Collections Lifecycle Model","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Central cataloging, legacy and orphan identification, required metadata, living collection plans, repeated evaluation, uniqueness and future-value exceptions, ownership and agreement checks, retention/transfer/destruction pathways, documented disposition, and named institutional responsibilities cover most of the proposed package.","remaining_difference":"The retained guidance does not require a shadow pilot, quantitative risk score, quarantine-as-soft-delete state, or stratified test of physical retrieval plus digital-lineage reconnection."},{"name":"Geoscience Australia Geological Collections Management Policy","source_ids":["SRC4"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"A formal acquisition-to-disposal lifecycle combines capacity constraints, minimum metadata, inventory and valuation, redundancy and degradation criteria, approval, safety, security, legal precedence, and periodic policy review.","remaining_difference":"The policy is high-level and does not expose the operational scoring method, dependency coverage, storage-service tiers, rollback window, or restore testing."},{"name":"Spectrum collections-management standard","source_ids":["SRC5"],"same_problem":false,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Documented lifecycle management from entry to governed deaccession is an established cross-domain museum standard.","remaining_difference":"Spectrum is not specific to geoscience sample integrity, publication reproducibility, core storage, hazardous geological materials, or geological ownership regimes."}],"contrastive_claim_remaining":"For legacy geological accessions already governed by lifecycle and deaccession policies, adding explicit storage-service tiers, publication-and-derivative dependency checks, and stratified physical-retrieval-plus-lineage restore drills will improve simulated active-space and retrieval outcomes over ordinary policy-compliant expert review without increasing false flags among unique, protected, or soon-requested samples.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"Falsify the incremental claim if blinded reviewers cannot assign tiers reliably; dependency tracing remains materially incomplete; restore tests fail; simulated space or retrieval outcomes do not improve over ordinary expert review; or protected, unique, legally constrained, or soon-requested accessions are flagged disproportionately.","confidence":"HIGH","search_limitations":"This was a bounded public-web search using English, French, and Spanish terminology. It did not inspect nonpublic repository procedures, implementation logs, procurement systems, all jurisdictions, patent databases, or paywalled literature comprehensively. Official policies show prescribed and, in some cases, scheduled practice but do not prove uniform compliance or effectiveness."},"researchability_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Official guidance recognizes legacy and orphan collections, missing metadata, storage constraints, redundancy, degradation, hazards, and formerly unstandardized management; BRGM supplies a concrete unmanaged-storage case.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC7","SRC8"]},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Repository managers, curators, collections committees, Science Center Directors, Geoscience Australia directors and CEO, and IGME technical management are identifiable decision makers.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC6","SRC8"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Although the broad lifecycle package is established, the retained sources do not combine evidence-weighted service tiering, explicit scientific-dependency tracing, and a restore drill; that addition can be compared against ordinary policy-compliant expert review.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4","SRC8"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A nonmoving shadow review of 300 accessions over eight weeks, followed by blinded agreement analysis, dependency-coverage measurement, simulated capacity/retrieval comparison, and restore testing of a stratified sample, is bounded and produces decision-relevant evidence.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC4","SRC8"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The proposed first step moves or destroys nothing and halts on ownership, identifier, hazard, dependency, or restore failures. External policies confirm that ownership, formal approval, legal obligations, hazards, restricted information, and destructive sampling must remain controlling gates.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC6","SRC8"]},"adequate_search_evidence":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"All six required lanes were searched with broader and component-level terminology; exactly eight retained sources were opened, spanning five independent publishers, three languages, historical and current material, an official standard, a primary administrative report, and multiple first-party government policies.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4","SRC5","SRC6","SRC7","SRC8"]}},"strict_success":false,"screen_survival":false,"remaining_research_value":"MODERATE","recommended_next_step":"Reframe the proposal as an incremental implementation experiment rather than a new lifecycle-management concept. Run the authorized shadow pilot and preregister comparison metrics: reviewer agreement, metadata and dependency coverage, protected-item false-positive rate, simulated active-space reduction, retrieval time, restore success, and staff effort. Do not move, consolidate, delist, or destroy samples during this step.","world_novelty_boundary":"The search supports only that the broad problem–intervention package is established practice and that a narrower tiering-plus-dependency-plus-restore-test increment was not located in the retained sources. It cannot establish world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, realized impact, or absence of equivalent nonpublic or differently described practice."}