{"judgments":[{"pair_id":"E12Q009","scores_a":{"structural_fidelity":4,"domain_fidelity":3,"causal_coherence":3,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":2,"contrivance_risk":4},"scores_b":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":5,"causal_coherence":5,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":4,"contrivance_risk":1},"winner":"B","reason":"B directly repairs a real, bounded operator goal-model-action-feedback loop; A is impressively specified but relies on uncertain, fragile material-response assumptions and stretches agency into a complex passive mechanism."},{"pair_id":"E12Q025","scores_a":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":4,"causal_coherence":4,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":4,"contrivance_risk":2},"scores_b":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":4,"causal_coherence":4,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":4,"practicality":3,"contrivance_risk":3},"winner":"A","reason":"Both target correlated capsule activation well, but A isolates release decorrelation with a simpler, tightly bounded calorimetric test. B adds feedback-controlled oven gating that is plausible but introduces delayed sensing and confounds the material-level claim."},{"pair_id":"E12Q020","scores_a":{"structural_fidelity":4,"domain_fidelity":2,"causal_coherence":3,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":4,"practicality":2,"contrivance_risk":5},"scores_b":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":5,"causal_coherence":5,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":4,"practicality":5,"contrivance_risk":1},"winner":"B","reason":"B maps the agency failure in reconciliation work directly and preserves accounting-control boundaries. A provides a testable apparatus but materially overcomplicates a mass-consistency check and its physical representation does not resolve core audit-evidence limitations."},{"pair_id":"E12Q036","scores_a":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":5,"causal_coherence":5,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":4,"contrivance_risk":1},"scores_b":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":2,"causal_coherence":4,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":2,"contrivance_risk":5},"winner":"A","reason":"A is a well-bounded formal derivation kernel for a domain where typed premises, explicit rules, traces, and interpretation boundaries are genuinely load-bearing. B realizes the formal structure physically but is impractical and too narrow for ordinary custody accounting."},{"pair_id":"E12Q028","scores_a":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":5,"causal_coherence":5,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":4,"practicality":4,"contrivance_risk":1},"scores_b":{"structural_fidelity":3,"domain_fidelity":4,"causal_coherence":4,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":4,"contrivance_risk":4},"winner":"A","reason":"A directly instantiates safe, plural, autonomy-preserving mentor enculturation for tacit process-safety judgment. B is a plausible crystallization hypothesis, but its mentor mapping is largely decorative anthropomorphism rather than relational cultural transmission."},{"pair_id":"E12Q035","scores_a":{"structural_fidelity":4,"domain_fidelity":3,"causal_coherence":4,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":3,"contrivance_risk":3},"scores_b":{"structural_fidelity":5,"domain_fidelity":5,"causal_coherence":5,"operational_specificity":5,"testability":5,"practicality":4,"contrivance_risk":1},"winner":"B","reason":"B is a direct software-agent control-loop hypothesis with clear authority limits, updates, and falsification. A forms a credible passive thermal controller, but the agency components are more metaphorically embodied and the domain fit is weaker."}]}