{"closest_prior_art":[{"name":"DiAGRAM — Digital Archiving Graphical Risk Assessment Model","overlap":"Combines linked risk events, quantitative probabilities, renderability, tool availability, fixity, replication, provenance, and scenario testing for preservation decisions.","remaining_difference":"It models archive-level conditions and scenarios rather than weekly object-version trajectories, persistent event episodes, reviewer-routing overrides, or a retrospective comparison against tier-only, score-only, and event-only scheduling.","source_ids":["SRC4"]},{"name":"NARA Digital Preservation Framework risk matrix","overlap":"Uses numeric format-risk scores to prioritize preservation action and documents that small score changes near Low/Moderate/High thresholds can produce outsized category changes.","remaining_difference":"Its assessment is primarily format-level and categorical; it does not combine object-version trajectories with timestamped failure and recovery episodes for review scheduling.","source_ids":["SRC1"]},{"name":"PREMIS preservation metadata standard","overlap":"Provides standardized Object, Event, Rights, and Agent entities and controlled preservation-event support suitable for recording fixity checks, migrations, validation, replication, and outcomes.","remaining_difference":"PREMIS structures authoritative preservation metadata but does not define continuous risk trajectories, event-episode boundaries, review priorities, or comparative decision-error testing.","source_ids":["SRC2"]},{"name":"DPC preservation-planning practice","overlap":"Treats preservation planning as ongoing monitoring of changing access risks, identifies risk-based trigger points for analysis or action, and discusses automated preservation watch and PREMIS-derived threat assessment.","remaining_difference":"It does not specify the proposed object-version hybrid ordering rule, weekly cadence, episode closure rules, or four-model validation design.","source_ids":["SRC3"]}],"contrastive_claim_falsifier":"The claim is falsified if held-out adjudication shows that the hybrid model fails to reduce either cutoff-sensitive priority errors or missed consequential events relative to tier-only, continuous-only, and event-only models, or if librarians cannot apply its episode boundaries reproducibly.","contrastive_claim_remaining":"At object-version granularity, weekly continuous indicators plus timestamped, review-triggering event episodes may outperform tier-only, continuous-only, and event-only scheduling specifically when reviewed errors occur both near category cutoffs and around consequential state changes.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","gates":{"adequate_source_search":{"rationale":"The bounded search covered the exact proposal, broader risk-scoring terminology, preservation-watch and planning terminology, standards, products, and combinations of scoring, monitoring, events, fixity, renderability, and prioritization. Four opened sources from four publishers include an official standard, government guidance, professional guidance, and a first-party tool. No exact-title result was treated as novelty evidence.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"bounded_next_test":{"rationale":"A read-only, 12-month retrospective of at most 200 object versions is finite and measurable. Existing event metadata and preservation observations can support comparisons on missed events, cutoff-sensitive reversals, reviewer agreement, and missing-data sensitivity without changing repository objects or live queues.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3"],"status":"PASS"},"distinct_testable_claim":{"rationale":"Adjacent work separately supplies categorical scores, preservation events, monitoring triggers, and quantitative risk models, but the proposal makes a distinct falsifiable comparison of four representations at object-version level with explicit event-episode routing and dual error outcomes.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"},"no_obvious_safety_or_authority_stop":{"rationale":"The first step is read-only and retrospective; operational prioritization and remediation remain with designated staff. Explicit stops address unreliable joins, timestamp ambiguity, sensitive metadata, and confusion of derived classifications with authoritative records. No source indicates that such analysis inherently requires live remediation.","source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3"],"status":"PASS"},"supported_problem":{"rationale":"NARA directly documents threshold amplification: small numeric-score changes near categorical boundaries can change risk levels disproportionately. Professional and government tools also recognize changing access risks, monitoring triggers, event relationships, and renderability dependencies. Evidence does not directly establish missed object-level incidents under the stated baseline, so support is partial.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PASS"}},"prior_art_disposition":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","problem_evidence":{"finding":"The category-cliff portion is directly visible in NARA's operational framework, while evolving access risk, preservation triggers, and linked risk events are established practices. The specific assertion that periodic object tiers conceal consequential failures between reviews was not directly demonstrated by the retained sources.","source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"],"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED"},"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_light_screen_20260806","schema_version":1,"screen_id":"E13P128","screen_survival":true,"search_lanes":{"component_combination":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["digital preservation \"risk score\" object event fixity preservation planning","digital preservation \"risk profile\" automated monitoring events repository","digital preservation repository object version risk score events PREMIS","digital preservation continuous risk monitoring event-based preservation planning"],"source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"direct_problem_and_intervention":{"no_result_note":"No source naming the exact hybrid event–trajectory proposal was located; adjacent mechanisms were assessed instead, and the phrase miss was not treated as evidence of novelty.","queries":["\"Hybrid Event–Trajectory Model\" \"Digital-Preservation\"","digital preservation hybrid continuous trajectory discrete events review prioritization","repository preservation review priority continuous risk trajectory event episode","digital object preservation scheduling risk tiers event queue"],"source_ids":["SRC1"]},"products_practices_and_standards":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["NDSA Levels of Digital Preservation fixity monitoring storage tiers","Preservica preservation risk score automated monitoring file formats","PREMIS Data Dictionary preservation events validation fixity check migration object official","Rosetta preservation risk analysis scheduling digital repository"],"source_ids":["SRC2","SRC3","SRC4"]},"synonyms_and_historical_terms":{"no_result_note":null,"queries":["digital preservation risk assessment tiers continuous score fixity renderability repository prioritization","digital preservation \"risk profile\" automated monitoring events repository","SCAPE Scout preservation watch risks events digital objects","digital preservation preservation planning risk assessment file format obsolescence scoring"],"source_ids":["SRC1","SRC3","SRC4"]}},"sources":[{"claims_supported":["Small numeric risk-score changes near Low/Moderate/High thresholds can produce outsized risk-level changes.","NARA uses a format-risk matrix and preservation action plans to prioritize preservation action."],"publisher":"U.S. National Archives and Records Administration","source_id":"SRC1","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","title":"Digital Preservation Framework Updates, October–December 2024","url":"https://fixity-check.blogs.archives.gov/2025/01/08/digital-preservation-framework-updates-october-december-2024/"},{"claims_supported":["PREMIS is an international preservation-metadata standard implemented in preservation systems.","It defines support for digital objects, preservation events, rights, schemas, and controlled event vocabularies."],"publisher":"Library of Congress","source_id":"SRC2","source_type":"OFFICIAL_STANDARD","title":"PREMIS: Preservation Metadata Maintenance Activity","url":"https://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/"},{"claims_supported":["Preservation planning monitors changes affecting sustainability and access.","Risk assessment converts detected changes into trigger points for analysis, planning, or action.","Preservation-watch systems and PREMIS metadata can support risk detection and threat assessment."],"publisher":"Digital Preservation Coalition","source_id":"SRC3","source_type":"TRADE_PROFESSIONAL","title":"Preservation Planning — Digital Preservation Handbook","url":"https://www.dpconline.org/handbook/organisational-activities/preservation-planning"},{"claims_supported":["DiAGRAM quantitatively links preservation risk events using a Bayesian network and supports scenario effects on risk.","Its model includes replication, checksums, renderability, tool availability, preservation-action provenance, and conditions of use."],"publisher":"The National Archives (UK) and University of Warwick","source_id":"SRC4","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","title":"DiAGRAM — The Digital Archiving Graphical Risk Assessment Model","url":"https://diagram.nationalarchives.gov.uk/"}],"world_novelty_boundary":"This bounded four-source web screen found adjacent combinations of categorical and quantitative risk assessment, preservation-event metadata, monitoring triggers, and linked risk-event modeling, but no retained source implementing the proposal's full object-version event-episode plus weekly-trajectory scheduling rule and four-way validation. That absence cannot establish world novelty, patentability, market size, expert acceptance, or realized value."}