{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp12_substrate_denial72_20260805","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp12_light_screen_20260805","cell_id":"inversion_of_control__accounting_auditing","search_lanes":{"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"queries":["audit evidence readiness event activates testing queue reconciliation packet","external audit request before evidence ready replacement upload PBC","client triggered audit testing readiness PBC workflow webhook"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"no_result_note":null},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"queries":["prepared by client PBC requests client ready workflow","provided by client request list audit client uploads status","client assistance schedule audit evidence request workflow"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_and_standards":{"queries":["audit PBC request software client readiness status upload version audit trail","Suralink request list client upload automatic sample testing","PCAOB AS 1105 company-produced audit evidence"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"no_result_note":null},"component_combination":{"queries":["signed readiness attestation immutable audit evidence snapshot testing trigger","reconciliation signoff frozen support manifest audit activation fallback date","client upload triggers external audit test procedure"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"],"no_result_note":"No retained source disclosed the complete reconciliation-specific combination of dual readiness attestations, ledger tie-out, unresolved-item disclosure, frozen manifest, immutable snapshot, auditor override, and automatic fallback date."}},"sources":[{"source_id":"SRC1","title":"Cloud Testing Suite","publisher":"Suralink","url":"https://www.suralink.com/technology/cloud-testing-suite-suralink","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["Suralink describes validating every client PBC upload against original request criteria and automatically performing sample testing.","Its Data Vouching Agent executes firm-defined test procedures when client documents arrive; the company explicitly describes client fulfillment as a trigger that begins testing without manual launch.","The workflow retains human review, flags exceptions, and logs agent actions for audit-trail purposes.","The engagement team still establishes the initial request list, so this source does not disclose eliminating the antecedent auditor request."]},{"source_id":"SRC2","title":"Request List Management","publisher":"Suralink","url":"https://www.suralink.com/technology/request-list-management","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["Suralink provides dynamic PBC request lists, assigned client users, real-time status, notifications, acceptance or return of submissions, and request-level audit trails.","It describes an end-to-end workflow from request through test and supports e-signatures, but frames client activity as fulfillment of an initial PBC request list established by the firm."]},{"source_id":"SRC3","title":"Auditi Features: PBC Management & Client Collaboration","publisher":"Auditi","url":"https://www.auditi.com/pbc","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","claims_supported":["Auditi identifies operational friction involving files lacking request context, matching documents to versions and reviewers, clarifications outside the evidence trail, and manual reconstruction of status.","The product supports request owners, due dates, client uploads, review statuses, version histories, notifications, complete activity logs, and timestamps showing when requests and deliveries occurred."]},{"source_id":"SRC4","title":"AS 1105: Audit Evidence","publisher":"Public Company Accounting Oversight Board","url":"https://pcaobus.org/oversight/standards/auditing-standards/details/AS1105","source_type":"OFFICIAL_STANDARD","claims_supported":["The auditor must plan and perform procedures to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence supporting the audit opinion.","For company-produced information, the auditor must evaluate accuracy, completeness, precision, and detail as applicable.","Timing affects evidence relevance, and a company readiness assertion cannot substitute for the auditor's evaluation of evidence reliability or sufficiency."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"The problem is visible at the broader workflow level: first-party products explicitly address incomplete or mismatched PBC uploads, corrective follow-up, version and reviewer matching, clarification trails, status reconstruction, and the importance of evidence timing. The retained sources do not directly establish that auditors commonly request reconciliation packets before reviewer signoff or final package stability, nor quantify how much replacement work is caused specifically by premature requests.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"]},"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"Suralink Cloud Testing Suite trigger-based sample testing","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2"],"overlap":"The audit firm defines initial requests and testing criteria; a client fulfillment event triggers validation and automatic execution of audit test procedures; exceptions remain subject to human review; actions are logged. This substantially overlaps the proposed inversion from auditor manual initiation to evidence-arrival-triggered testing.","remaining_difference":"The retained descriptions do not require a reconciliation-specific, dual-signed readiness event covering ledger tie-out, reviewer signoff, unresolved-item disclosure, and a frozen manifest; they also do not disclose an immutable package snapshot, bounded activation window, auditor override rule, or automatic fallback request."},{"name":"Auditi PBC request and evidence-readiness workflow","source_ids":["SRC3"],"overlap":"Structured requests, assigned preparers and reviewers, readiness-visible statuses, client uploads, notifications, version history, clarification context, delivery timestamps, and detailed audit trails.","remaining_difference":"The product improves collection and readiness visibility but does not disclose a validated client event automatically activating a predeclared external-audit procedure."},{"name":"PCAOB AS 1105 audit-evidence framework","source_ids":["SRC4"],"overlap":"Auditor-defined procedures, attention to evidence timing and provenance, evaluation of company-produced information, and retained auditor responsibility for sufficient appropriate evidence.","remaining_difference":"The standard establishes authority and evidence requirements rather than a client-triggered workflow, immutable manifest, override mechanism, or deadline fallback."}],"prior_art_disposition":"SUBSTANTIAL_COLLISION","contrastive_claim_remaining":"The remaining contrast is limited to the control envelope around an already-visible client-event-triggered testing pattern: for low-risk account reconciliations, a dual-authenticated readiness event must attest to ledger tie-out, completed review, disclosed unresolved items, and a frozen support manifest; it must bind testing to an immutable snapshot and operate with an explicit auditor override and time fallback. The broad claim that client evidence fulfillment can automatically trigger predefined audit testing is already disclosed by Suralink.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The remaining claim is falsified as distinct prior art if an existing product or documented practice applies multi-party reconciliation-readiness conditions to a version-bound evidence package and automatically queues auditor-defined testing with override and deadline fallback. Its proposed benefit is falsified if retrospective replay shows that the rule cannot be reconstructed consistently, triggers no closer to final package stability than ordinary requests, fails to reduce replacements or clarifications, or increases deadline clustering and fallback use.","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"The search covered direct phrasing, PBC and provided-by-client terminology, commercial request and testing products, the governing evidence standard, and combinations of readiness, attestation, snapshot, trigger, override, and fallback components. Exactly four opened sources from three publishers were retained, including first-party products and an official standard. This is adequate only for a coarse screen.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"First-party product descriptions make evidence-timing, incomplete-upload, correction, version, clarification, and status-reconstruction friction visible. Because they do not isolate premature auditor requests as the cause or establish prevalence, the problem is only partly supported.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"]},"distinct_testable_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Although the broad trigger inversion substantially collides with Suralink, the narrower combination of reconciliation-specific readiness attestations, immutable snapshot binding, override, and fallback remains explicit and falsifiable through product discovery or event-log replay.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"]},"bounded_next_test":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A read-only replay on 12 completed low-risk reconciliation packets is bounded and measurable. It can reconstruct the readiness rule, compare hypothetical activation against actual request and stable-package timestamps, and count replacements, clarifications, overrides, fallback breaches, and deadline clustering without changing audit work.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3"]},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"No obvious stop prevents a retrospective replay. Any later implementation must preserve auditor control over procedure design, evidence evaluation, selection, timing overrides, and the opinion; a readiness signal cannot establish evidence sufficiency. Independence concerns, strategic delay, or impeded auditor access are halt conditions.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC4"]}},"screen_survival":false,"world_novelty_boundary":"This bounded search found a first-party product that already uses client fulfillment as a trigger for firm-defined audit testing, creating substantial collision with the proposal's core inversion. It did not establish whether the narrower dual-attestation, reconciliation-specific, immutable-snapshot, override-and-fallback configuration exists elsewhere. The screen cannot establish world novelty, patentability, market size, expert acceptance, implementation feasibility, realized value, or the absence of undisclosed products, firm methodologies, patents, or private practices."}