{"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"UKSCA net plyometric training-stress monitoring framework","overlap":"Identifies foot-contact counts alone as inadequate because impact characteristics vary between exercises; discusses impulse as the force-time integral and a potential volume-load measure; and proposes multiplying contacts by force-derived exercise weighting factors.","remaining_difference":"Uses exercise-level peak-force weighting rather than measured per-contact impulses accumulated across an actual set, and does not preserve individual force-time pulses to reveal outliers or within-set drift.","source_ids":["SRC3"]},{"name":"Force-platform comparison of four bilateral plyometric exercises","overlap":"Directly measures stance-phase peak vertical ground-reaction force, impulse, and loading rates and demonstrates significant kinetic differences among commonly used plyometric exercises.","remaining_difference":"Compares standardized exercise trials rather than testing whether equal-count training sets have unequal cumulative impulse or whether individual-contact traces add information beyond counts and set averages.","source_ids":["SRC1"]},{"name":"Systematic review of drop-jump volume and intensity methods","overlap":"Documents methodological problems and lack of consensus in plyometric volume and intensity determination, rejects drop height as a sufficient intensity determinant, and identifies ground-reaction force and impulse among relevant measures.","remaining_difference":"Does not report a validated shadow workflow that segments every set into contacts, integrates continuous force within each valid contact, accumulates set impulse, and retains pulses for outlier analysis.","source_ids":["SRC2"]}],"contrastive_claim_falsifier":"Falsify the remaining claim if, after prespecified calibration, surface-equivalence, clipping, and reviewer-agreement checks pass, contact count predicts cumulative validated impulse within the practical-equivalence margin across tested drills and athletes, while per-contact traces reveal no consequential outliers or drift beyond information retained by the set average.","contrastive_claim_remaining":"Under stable calibration and negligible measurement-surface effects, actual per-contact force-time integration across an approved set will distinguish some mechanically unequal equal-count sets and preserve consequential individual contacts that exercise-level contact weighting, raw counts, or set averages do not preserve.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"rationale":"The bounded search covered the proposal directly, cumulative-impulse and mechanical-load terminology, established coaching guidance, force-plate products and validation, and component combinations involving contact thresholds, body-weight subtraction, sampling, and impulse. Four opened direct sources span four publishers and include primary research and first-party technical guidance.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"bounded_next_test":{"rationale":"A single-session shadow study is bounded and capable of testing calibration recovery, contact segmentation, equal-count impulse differences, and hidden within-set variation. Certified-load and repeatable-drop checks should include the plate's dynamic response because 1 kHz sampling alone cannot overcome inadequate transducer bandwidth or ringing.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"distinct_testable_claim":{"rationale":"Prior art already establishes unequal plyometric kinetics and force-informed load monitoring, but the narrower claim about measured cumulative set impulse plus retained per-contact pulses versus count-only and set-average representations remains operationally distinguishable and falsifiable.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"status":"PASS"},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"rationale":"The authorized first step is non-prescriptive shadow measurement of consenting adults during an already-approved session. Coaching, medical, installation, and athlete authority remain intact, with explicit stops for altered surfaces, hazards, calibration loss, clipping, and decision influence. Dynamic-response limitations must be treated as invalidation criteria rather than corrected through athlete exposure.","source_ids":["SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"supported_problem":{"rationale":"The sources directly show that contact counts omit variable impact characteristics, that force-platform measures differ across exercises, and that plyometric volume and intensity methods lack consensus. They also caution that impulse alone can conceal force-profile shape, supporting retention of individual traces.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"status":"PASS"}},"prior_art_disposition":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","problem_evidence":{"finding":"The problem is supported: established coaching practice records contacts but recognizes that contacts alone are inadequate; primary force-platform research demonstrates exercise-dependent differences in impulse, peak force, and loading rate; and a systematic review reports unresolved methodological problems in volume and intensity determination. The proposed set-level hybrid representation is narrower than this established evidence.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"],"status":"SUPPORTED"},"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_light_screen_20260806","schema_version":1,"screen_id":"E13P098","screen_survival":true,"search_lanes":{"component_combination":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["Jarvis Graham-Smith Comfort plyometric impulse volume-load force-time","force plate contact detection threshold landing impulse body weight subtraction"],"source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4"]},"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["plyometric training dose ground contacts force plate impulse equal contact count","\"plyometric\" \"cumulative impulse\" force plate training load"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"]},"products_practices_and_standards":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["NSCA plyometric volume ground contacts guidelines position statement","portable force plate 1000 Hz landing impulse validation"],"source_ids":["SRC3","SRC4"]},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["\"mechanical load\" plyometric \"ground contacts\" quantification","\"plyometric intensity\" impulse ground reaction force exercises"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3"]}},"sources":[{"claims_supported":["Four bilateral plyometric exercises produced differing peak vertical ground-reaction force, impulse, and loading-rate results.","Force platforms can identify mechanically different landing kinetics across exercise conditions."],"publisher":"U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed","source_id":"SRC1","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","title":"Impact kinetics associated with four common bilateral plyometric exercises","url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29687688/"},{"claims_supported":["Plyometric training research lacks consensus and has methodological problems in determining volume and intensity.","Drop height alone is not an adequate intensity determinant; ground-reaction force, impulse, power, and other factors are relevant.","Landing surface affects plyometric mechanics and should be reported and controlled."],"publisher":"Frontiers Media SA","source_id":"SRC2","source_type":"SECONDARY_RESEARCH","title":"Methodological considerations for determining the volume and intensity of drop jump training: a systematic, critical and prepositive review","url":"https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10160442/"},{"claims_supported":["Foot contacts or repetitions are a practical volume measure but are inadequate alone because impact characteristics vary substantially among exercises.","Impulse is a reliable potential volume-load measure, while its scalar value can conceal the force-time profile and peak stress.","A coaching framework already combines contact counts with force-derived exercise weighting factors to estimate plyometric volume-load."],"publisher":"UK Strength and Conditioning Association","source_id":"SRC3","source_type":"TRADE_PROFESSIONAL","title":"How to monitor net plyometric training stress: guidelines for the coach","url":"https://cdn.uksca.org.uk/assets/pdfs/UkscaIqPdfs/how-to-monitor-net-plyometric-training-stress-guidelines-for-the-coach-636830646842012930.pdf"},{"claims_supported":["Force-plate dynamic response and ringing constrain the shortest impulse that can be measured faithfully.","Recommended sampling can be 500 Hz or 1 kHz for a specified plate, but sampling faster does not overcome the load-cell response limit.","Bench testing must assess dynamic response rather than assuming that sampling cadence alone guarantees transition fidelity."],"publisher":"Vernier Science Education","source_id":"SRC4","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","title":"How short an impulse can I measure with the Force Plate?","url":"https://www.vernier.com/til/1298"}],"world_novelty_boundary":"This bounded public-web screen found adjacent prior art for force-platform plyometric kinetics, force-time impulse, contact-weighted volume-load, and measurement-resolution limits, but no retained source directly implementing the complete per-contact-plus-continuous-force set workflow. That absence cannot establish world novelty, patentability, market size, expert acceptance, or realized training value."}