{"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"NASA Langley wind-tunnel data-quality assurance using check standards and statistical control charts","overlap":"Uses check-standard and customer repeat runs, Shewhart control charts, and statistical evaluation, control, and improvement of test-section calibration, balance force/moment measurement, and instrument-calibration processes across five facilities.","remaining_difference":"The retained account does not establish the proposal's full configuration-state binding, checksum provenance, disaggregated sentinel panel, staged persistence/acceleration rules, or explicit data-governance response path.","source_ids":["SRC1"]},{"name":"NASA Langley check-standard testing program with design-of-experiments-enhanced SPC","overlap":"Tracks measurement variation over time, assesses overall facility health, models calibration and balance coefficients, and places those coefficients on control charts for process improvement and uncertainty characterization.","remaining_difference":"The source does not show that all reference observations are bound to the complete mount, article, instrumentation, environmental, and reduction-software state or that alerts govern retrospective qualification of campaign evidence.","source_ids":["SRC2"]},{"name":"CAATS automotive wind-tunnel statistical process control","overlap":"Applies control charts to complete wind-tunnel variability, separates repeatability timescales, develops a recurring SPC test matrix, and demonstrates maintenance use through boundary-layer-fan performance after a failure.","remaining_difference":"It concerns an automotive rolling-road tunnel and does not document the proposed subsonic aircraft reference article, multi-signal provenance record, or named escalation and design-evidence authorities.","source_ids":["SRC3"]},{"name":"NASA multi-facility check-standard repeatability modeling","overlap":"Uses stable artifacts and extensive check-standard histories to characterize short-term, within-test, and across-test behavior of seven measurement processes in three wind tunnels and support process improvement and uncertainty models.","remaining_difference":"Its stated focus is repeatability modeling rather than the proposal's complete configuration-controlled deterioration-and-governance loop.","source_ids":["SRC4"]}],"contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The residual contrast is falsified if a blinded retrospective shows that configuration-bound, disaggregated reference trends do not predict independently confirmed facility, mount, instrumentation, or processing changes earlier than the existing check-standard, calibration, and readiness controls, or if controlled reinstallation cannot reproduce the reference signature.","contrastive_claim_remaining":"Beyond established check-standard/SPC practice, the remaining testable claim is that binding every recurring reference observation to the complete article, mount, instrumentation, environment, and reduction state—and applying persistence, acceleration, correlation, and diagnosis-lead-time rules across disaggregated signals—produces earlier, correctly localized, actionable warnings than the facility's existing check-standard program.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"rationale":"The bounded search covered the proposal directly, historical terms such as check standard and statistical quality control, calibration/reference-model practices, standards-oriented terminology, and combinations involving repeatability, control charts, facility health, and maintenance. Four opened sources span NASA, Old Dominion University, and SAE International.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"bounded_next_test":{"rationale":"A read-only review of at most 12 campaigns followed, if authorized, by three nonbinding scheduled-session checks is limited in scope and can compare warning timing, reproducibility, false alerts, provenance gaps, and existing-control timing. The retained work supplies applicable check-standard, repeatability, and SPC comparators.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"distinct_testable_claim":{"rationale":"Although the broad reference-article/SPC loop is established, a narrower contrast remains measurable: whether complete configuration binding and multi-signal persistence/acceleration rules detect and localize confirmed changes earlier than the existing check-standard workflow.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"rationale":"The authorized first step is read-only, any shadow runs remain inside approved sessions and procedures, alerts are nonbinding, and recalibration, maintenance, data qualification, repetition, or pauses remain with existing test and design authorities. No obvious stop applies unless tunnel time, equipment safety, controlled data, or reproducibility limits are breached.","source_ids":[],"status":"PASS"},"supported_problem":{"rationale":"The sources show meaningful short-, within-, and across-test variability, the need to track wind-tunnel measurement systems over time, facility-health assessment, and maintenance-relevant SPC. They support the general measurement-stability problem, though not every proposed degradation mechanism or downstream design consequence.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"}},"prior_art_disposition":"ESTABLISHED_PRACTICE","problem_evidence":{"finding":"The general problem is visible: wind-tunnel measurement processes exhibit time-dependent variability that motivates stable check artifacts, repeat-run histories, control charts, uncertainty models, and facility-health monitoring. Evidence is only partial for the stronger claim that individually acceptable component changes routinely combine into latent cross-campaign aerodynamic bias.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED"},"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_light_screen_20260806","schema_version":1,"screen_id":"E13P085","screen_survival":false,"search_lanes":{"component_combination":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["wind tunnel check standard balance calibration data quality assurance","check standard wind tunnel control chart","wind tunnel reference model monitoring repeatability control chart"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["wind tunnel standard model check test long term facility calibration reference model trends","NASA wind tunnel check standard statistical process control reference model data quality assurance"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"]},"products_practices_and_standards":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["AIAA wind tunnel calibration standard check model facility flow quality","wind tunnel standard model periodic testing trend facility modifications measurement chain","automotive wind tunnel statistical process control maintenance"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"]},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["wind tunnel calibration model reference model test check-standard statistical quality control","check standard wind tunnel statistical process control facility health"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC4"]}},"sources":[{"claims_supported":["NASA Langley used statistical quality control with check-standard and customer repeat-run sets.","Control-chart results covered five facilities and included test-section calibration, balance force/moment measurement, and instrument calibration."],"publisher":"NASA Technical Reports Server","source_id":"SRC1","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","title":"Langley Wind Tunnel Data Quality Assurance—Check Standard Results","url":"https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20000099747"},{"claims_supported":["NASA Langley already had a wind-tunnel check-standard testing program aimed at data quality, uncertainty quantification, process control, and improvement.","SPC tracked measurements over time and assessed facility health; regression coefficients for calibration, force, and flow angularity were tracked on control charts."],"publisher":"Old Dominion University","source_id":"SRC2","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","title":"Design of Experiments Enhanced Statistical Process Control for Wind Tunnel Check Standard Testing","url":"https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/mae_etds/15/"},{"claims_supported":["SPC has been applied to the complete variability of an operating automotive wind tunnel.","Three-way control charts address different repeatability levels and were used in a maintenance example involving fan performance after a failure."],"publisher":"SAE International","source_id":"SRC3","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","title":"CAATS – Automotive Wind Tunnel Statistical Process Control","url":"https://saemobilus.sae.org/papers/caats-automotive-wind-tunnel-statistical-process-control-2024-01-2542"},{"claims_supported":["Extensive check-standard data from seven measurement processes in three NASA Langley wind tunnels were used to model short-term, within-test, and across-test repeatability.","The analysis supported measurement-process improvement and uncertainty-model development."],"publisher":"NASA Technical Reports Server","source_id":"SRC4","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","title":"Repeatability Modeling for Wind-Tunnel Measurements: Results for Three Langley Facilities","url":"https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140011908.pdf"}],"world_novelty_boundary":"This bounded public-web screen found substantial, long-running practice around stable wind-tunnel check artifacts, recurring measurements, statistical control charts, facility-health monitoring, repeatability analysis, and maintenance support. It did not establish whether the proposal's exact configuration-provenance and governance package has appeared elsewhere. The result cannot establish world novelty, patentability, market size, expert acceptance, or realized value."}