{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp12_substrate_denial72_20260805","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp12_light_screen_20260805","cell_id":"formal_derivation_system_design__accounting_auditing","search_lanes":{"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"queries":["inventory custody transfer source underflow duplicate transfer reference missing receipt audit inventory records controls","mechanical token ledger inventory transfer beads custody locations","patent mechanical inventory accounting machine counters transfer units source destination"],"source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3"],"no_result_note":"No exact implementation of a multi-location custody ledger that atomically relocates conserved physical beads through keyed, underflow-blocking and sequence-locking mechanics was located."},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"queries":["mechanical stock ledger beads inventory locations transfer device","physical token accounting system inventory transfer conserved tokens","interlocking mechanical bookkeeping machine debit credit patent","US1931115A accounting machine proving mechanism prevents further operation second entry does not correspond"],"source_ids":["SRC3"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_and_standards":{"queries":["inventory transfer forms pre-numbered dual signatures physical inventory reconciliation standards custody","site:docs.oracle.com inventory transfer negative balance underflow prevent","site:gao.gov inventory records physical count discrepancies internal control inventory transfers","stock control token system two bin kanban physical tokens inventory ledger"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null},"component_combination":{"queries":["mechanical accounting proving mechanism unmatched entries lock operation","inventory transfer creates two journal entries source destination immutable record","transfer issue transfer receipt same transaction ID reconcile discrepancies","physical inventory count reconstruct balances from inventory transactions"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","title":"Executive Guide: Best Practices in Achieving Consistent, Accurate Physical Counts of Inventory and Related Property","publisher":"U.S. Government Accountability Office","url":"https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-01-763g","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","claims_supported":["Reliable inventory control requires accurate physical counts and inventory records.","Controls must provide assurance that transactions affecting inventory balances are properly executed and recorded.","Inventory characteristics and known control weaknesses affect the appropriate reconciliation approach."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"FIACCT 08-01_04 Inventory – Inventory Control – Stock Transfer Receipt (TR) Process","publisher":"State of Utah Division of Finance","url":"https://finance.utah.gov/state-agency-resources/policy/08-01_04/","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","claims_supported":["Warehouses must reconcile transfer-receipt transactions to transfer-issue transactions and resolve discrepancies.","Receivers verify physical quantities against recorded issue quantities and note discrepancies.","The receipt and issue use the same transaction identifier, while quantities and receipt information remain separately entered."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"US1931115A – Accounting machine","publisher":"Google Patents (patent issued to National Cash Register Company)","url":"https://patents.google.com/patent/US1931115A/en","source_type":"OTHER","claims_supported":["A historical mechanical accounting machine used a proving mechanism to compare a repeated entry with an earlier entry.","Its mechanism prevented further machine operation when the two entries did not correspond.","The design used counters, pinions, carriage positioning and mechanical locking rather than merely displaying an error."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"Understanding Inventory Transfers","publisher":"Oracle","url":"https://docs.oracle.com/en/applications/jd-edwards/supply-chain-manufacturing/9.2/eoaim/understanding-inventory-transfers.html","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["An inventory-transfer transaction can decrease the original location and increase the destination through two generated journal entries.","Both original and destination transaction information are required.","Transfer records cannot be deleted; erroneous transfers are corrected with reversing entries."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"The problem class is visible. Official guidance requires physical counts and reliable recording of inventory-affecting transactions, while Utah's transfer procedure specifically anticipates discrepancies between issued and received quantities and requires reconciliation under a common transfer identifier. These controls show that recorded source and destination states can disagree and that record-to-physical reconciliation is operationally necessary, although the retained sources do not establish prevalence or isolate duplicate references and source underflow as dominant causes.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2"]},"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"US1931115A mechanical accounting-machine proving mechanism","source_ids":["SRC3"],"overlap":"Mechanically stores an earlier entry, reversely checks a later counterpart entry, and locks further operation if the values do not correspond. This is close to mechanically excluding unmatched accounting expressions.","remaining_difference":"It proves repeated numerical entries in selected paper columns; it does not disclose one conserved material token per inventory unit, named custody-location rails, atomic relocation of those tokens, source-underflow blocking, or a physical custody-state model."},{"name":"Oracle JD Edwards inventory-transfer transaction","source_ids":["SRC4"],"overlap":"Treats one transfer as linked source decrease and destination increase, requires both locations, retains transaction history, and uses reversal rather than deletion.","remaining_difference":"The coupled control is software-based and journal-valued rather than a computation-free mechanism that moves the same conserved physical representations."},{"name":"Utah Transfer Issue/Transfer Receipt reconciliation process","source_ids":["SRC2"],"overlap":"Links dispatch and receipt using the same transaction identifier, verifies received quantity against issued quantity, records discrepancies, and requires resolution.","remaining_difference":"Issue and receipt remain separate human and system entries checked after movement; the procedure does not make unequal counterparts, underflow, incomplete strokes, or reused sequences mechanically unreachable."}],"prior_art_disposition":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","contrastive_claim_remaining":"For bounded whole-unit custody transfers, a fixture that represents every declared opening unit by one conserved bead and physically relocates the selected beads from a keyed source rail to a keyed destination rail in one accepted stroke can exclude source underflow, unequal source/destination quantities, incomplete transitions, and reused sequence tabs without software or separate counterpart-entry comparison. The retained prior art shows mechanical entry proving and software-coupled transfers separately, but not this conserved-material, multi-location combination.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"In a calibrated three-location bench fixture, any preregistered underflow, unequal-counterpart, partial-stroke, incompatible-key, or reused-sequence attempt reaches the accepted-state detent; any valid transfer is not accepted reliably; total beads are not conserved; or the claimed exclusion disappears when optional tape, software, authorization and review procedures are absent.","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The bounded search covered the proposal directly, bead/token and mechanical-ledger synonyms, historical mechanical accounting and proving terminology, official transfer and inventory-count practices, first-party transfer software, and combinations of mechanical locking with linked source/destination entries. Four opened or fetch-attempted retained sources span four publishers and include official guidance and first-party documentation.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Official inventory guidance and a government transfer-receipt procedure directly show the need for accurate transaction records, physical verification, matched issue/receipt identifiers and discrepancy reconciliation.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2"]},"distinct_testable_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Historical mechanical proving and modern coupled transfer posting narrow the claim, but neither retained source discloses the specific computation-free conservation of one physical token population across multiple keyed custody locations with underflow and sequence gating. Acceptance of scripted valid and invalid strokes is directly observable.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"bounded_next_test":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A non-production fixture with three fictional locations, inert pieces, a witnessed opening state and a preregistered matrix of valid, invalid and bypass trials can measure false acceptance, false rejection, conservation and reconstructability against the manual baseline without relying on live inventory.","source_ids":[]},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The proposed first test is limited to inert pieces and leaves the existing ledger authoritative. It excludes live assets, financial-statement reliance, custody changes and blame assignment, with explicit jam, bead-loss, ambiguity and disagreement halt conditions. No obvious safety or authority stop applies to that bench scope.","source_ids":[]}},"screen_survival":true,"world_novelty_boundary":"This coarse, bounded public-web search supports only an adjacent-prior-art disposition and a remaining testable contrast. It cannot establish world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, expert acceptance, prevalence, realized audit value, or that no unindexed product, patent, museum device or local practice already implements the combination."}