{"actors":["Literary historians constructing accounts of critical movements","Archive researchers coding dated critical documents and institutional records","A project lead deciding how a bounded corpus should be periodized and contextualized"],"affected_objective":"Auditable periodization of a critical movement for selecting, ordering, and contextualizing documents without treating gradual conceptual uptake as rigid succession or dissolving consequential historical events into a smooth trend.","arm":"ORDINARY_DIVERSE_P2","authority_safety":{"authorized_first_step":"The project lead may authorize an internal pilot on a frozen corpus of lawfully accessible critical documents and associated public records; the pilot may compare periodization models but may not establish canonical period boundaries or alter a public curriculum, catalogue, or exhibition.","decision_authority":"The project lead defines the bounded historical question, freezes the pilot corpus, and makes provisional model-selection decisions. Researchers code documentary observations and uncertainty but cannot infer authorial allegiance, settle disputed intellectual lineages, or change institutional classifications.","excluded_actions":["Do not present inferred movement membership or influence scores as facts about authors.","Do not rank authors, works, schools, or theoretical traditions from the model outputs.","Do not automatically include or exclude works from curricula, catalogues, or canons.","Do not infer historical causation from temporal proximity alone.","Do not publish period boundaries or institutional recommendations without separate scholarly review."],"halt_rollback":"Stop if event boundaries cannot be supported by dated records, continuous traces depend primarily on unstable coding choices, or model outputs obscure archival gaps. Preserve the frozen corpus and source-level notes, discard derived trajectories and period assignments, and return to document-specific chronological description."},"baseline":"For the proposed pilot, the corpus is organized by decade and assigned to named critical schools through document-level prose judgments. This makes dates visible but provides no explicit test of whether conceptual change should be treated as successive periods, gradual diffusion, or continuous uptake interrupted by identifiable publication and institutional events.","candidate_id":"discrete_continuous_model_selection__literature_literary_theory__ORDINARY_DIVERSE_P2","causal_chain":["The historical decision requires selecting and ordering documents that will represent how a critical concept changed over a bounded interval.","Conceptual vocabulary, citation patterns, and argumentative commitments may accumulate or recede gradually, while manifestos, journal launches or closures, organized controversies, and institutional reorganizations occur as dated events.","A sequence of fixed schools or decades can assign transitional documents to arbitrary stages and make adjacent documents appear historically discontinuous.","A wholly smooth trajectory can absorb dated reorganizations into averages even when those events change the relevant publication venues, affiliations, or available forums.","A hybrid periodization ledger preserves continuous document-level traces while representing only predeclared, source-supported institutional or publication changes as discrete events.","Explicit temporal resolution, event boundaries, continuity assumptions, and uncertainty fields make false segmentation and false smoothing inspectable.","Comparing the resulting document selections and contextual claims across rival representations tests whether model granularity materially changes the bounded historical account."],"cell_id":"discrete_continuous_model_selection__literature_literary_theory","consequence":"Transitional documents may be excluded or assigned categorical identities because they fall near an imposed period boundary, while dated changes in publication or institutional conditions may disappear inside a smoothed intellectual trend. Corpus selection and contextual claims can then depend on an unexamined model of historical change.","diversity_from_prior_proposals":"This opportunity addresses literary-historical periodization across dated critical documents and institutional conditions. Its intervention models gradual conceptual uptake and punctuating historical events; it does not model narrative sources, narrator reliability, passage attribution, or within-voice epistemic modulation.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","intervention":"Create a scale-sensitive periodization ledger for one frozen corpus and one predeclared historical question. At document resolution, researchers record continuous or ordinal traces for the presence, prominence, and argumentative function of a defined critical concept, always retaining quotations or citations that support each judgment. Separately, they register discrete events only when a dated source documents a change in publication venue, association, editorial control, access, or organized controversy relevant to the corpus. Conceptual traces may be summarized in fixed annual intervals but are not reset merely because a decade or named school changes. A discrete event creates a candidate boundary only when analysts can specify which observable corpus relation could differ on either side; otherwise it remains contextual metadata. Competing boundary placements and archival gaps remain explicit. Retain the hybrid representation only if comparison with pure-stage and pure-trend rivals shows that it makes consequential modeling errors more inspectable for the fixed selection and contextualization decisions.","mechanism_mapping":[{"counterfactual_removal":"Without a hybrid representation, the account must either impose successive periods on gradual conceptual change or smooth away dated changes in the conditions under which criticism circulated.","mechanism_slug":"hybrid_discrete_continuous_model","role":"Combines document-level trajectories of conceptual uptake with source-supported publication and institutional events."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without an explicit quantization rule, annual summaries or named periods can become unexamined boundaries that assign unlike historical identities to temporally adjacent documents.","mechanism_slug":"quantization_rule","role":"Makes any conversion from document-level observations to annual intervals or provisional periods explicit, reversible, and testable against boundary cases."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without a transition audit, the ledger could manufacture period breaks from convenient dates or overlook short-lived events concealed by the selected reporting interval.","mechanism_slug":"transition_resolution_audit","role":"Checks candidate boundaries, smooth regions, archival gaps, and scale changes against dated sources and resulting corpus decisions."}],"nearest_rivals":["A pure stage model assigning each document to a named school, generation, or decade","A continuous time trend derived from concept coding without discrete historical events","A chronological prose account without explicit granularity, boundary, or continuity rules"],"negative_tests":{"intervention_falsifier":"The intervention is falsified for the pilot if the hybrid ledger produces no more inspectable selection or contextualization decisions than the simpler rivals, while its event rules or continuous traces remain unstable across analysts or depend on arbitrary temporal intervals.","problem_falsifier":"The problem is falsified for the selected corpus if plausible stage, trend, and hybrid representations yield the same document selection, ordering, and contextual claims, or if the corpus contains neither gradual conceptual variation nor relevant dated events.","risks":["Coding conceptual prominence may reduce argumentative differences to a misleading common scale.","Surviving archives may make institutional events appear sharper or more complete than they were.","Dated events may be mistaken for causes of conceptual change.","Annual aggregation may conceal brief reversals or create apparent synchronization.","Predefined concepts may exclude vocabulary through which historical actors framed related questions.","The hybrid ledger may acquire unwarranted authority because it appears formally explicit."],"strongest_counterevidence":"If close examination shows that the apparent trajectory is produced by changes in archive composition, terminology, or document availability rather than change within the historical object, neither continuous traces nor event boundaries would support the proposed periodization decision."},"next_evidence_step":"Freeze a corpus of 30 lawfully accessible critical documents spanning one predeclared 40-year interval, plus no more than 12 dated records of relevant publication or institutional events. Two researchers independently code the fixed concept at document level and apply the hybrid ledger, pure-stage rival, and pure-trend rival. Using a predeclared task, each representation selects and orders 10 documents and supplies contextual statements for four boundary cases. Record coding disagreement, unsupported event boundaries, interval sensitivity, archival gaps, documents whose inclusion changes, and contextual claims that depend on the representation. End after this comparison and report source-level disagreements and failure cases.","observable_state":"For every corpus document: date and date uncertainty; publication venue; cited textual evidence for the concept's presence, prominence, and argumentative function; relevant citations and declared affiliations; coding confidence; archival gaps; aggregation interval; candidate event links; and resulting inclusion, ordering, and contextualization decisions. For every discrete event: dated source, event type, proposed boundary, observable relation expected to differ across it, competing interpretations, and whether the boundary survives review.","prior_art_status":"UNSEARCHED","problem":"A literary-history project must periodize the development of a critical concept in order to select and contextualize documents. Treating named schools or decades as discrete stages can force gradual uptake, overlap, and retreat into arbitrary succession. Treating the same history as a smooth trend can erase dated publication and institutional changes that alter the conditions under which arguments appear and circulate. Because the chosen representation governs which documents count as representative, transitional, or exceptional, wrong granularity can change the historical account produced from the same corpus.","proposal_index":2,"remaining_contrastive_claim":"For a bounded literary-historical corpus, separating gradual document-level conceptual change from source-supported publication and institutional events may reveal selection and contextualization errors that pure period stages and a single continuous trend cannot distinguish; the pilot must determine whether those differences persist across analysts and temporal resolutions.","revision_record":{"claim_changes":["Initial version; all anticipated differences are framed as falsifiable possibilities rather than established effects."],"conceptual_changes":["Initial formulation maps continuous change to document-level conceptual uptake and discrete change to dated publication or institutional events relevant to corpus relations."],"evidence_changes":["Initial bounded test specifies a frozen corpus, capped event record, two independent researchers, two formal rivals, fixed output tasks, and source-level failure measures."],"operational_changes":["Initial safeguards limit use to internal model comparison, preserve archival uncertainty, and prohibit canonical, curricular, or causal conclusions from the pilot."],"parent_version":null,"progress_targets_addressed":["Independent affected problem, intervention, and causal path","Decision-specific step-versus-flow choice","Explicit temporal granularity and candidate-boundary rules","Observable state and approximation consequences","Mechanism counterfactuals and nearest rivals","Authority limits, rollback, falsifiers, and risks","Bounded comparative evidence step"]},"schema_version":1,"structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"Decision Need","domain_realization":"Select, order, and contextualize documents representing the historical development of one critical concept."},{"archetype_element":"Process Change Signature","domain_realization":"Conceptual commitments may accumulate, overlap, recede, or change function gradually, while publication and institutional conditions can change through dated events."},{"archetype_element":"Cost of False Smoothness","domain_realization":"A smooth trend can conceal a documented change in venue, editorial control, association, access, or organized controversy relevant to the corpus."},{"archetype_element":"Cost of False Discreteness","domain_realization":"Fixed schools, generations, or decades can divide gradual change and assign categorical difference to temporally adjacent documents."},{"archetype_element":"Granularity Choice","domain_realization":"Use document-level conceptual observations, fixed annual summaries for comparison, and discrete candidate events supported by dated sources."},{"archetype_element":"Step Boundary","domain_realization":"An event becomes a candidate period boundary only when a dated source supports it and analysts name an observable corpus relation that could differ across the boundary."},{"archetype_element":"Continuity Assumption","domain_realization":"Conceptual traces may be interpolated only across adjacent observed intervals with comparable corpus composition, terminology, and documentary coverage; gaps remain unfilled."},{"archetype_element":"Measurement Resolution","domain_realization":"Code at individual-document resolution, summarize by year only for comparison, and inspect event timing at the finest precision supported by the dated record."},{"archetype_element":"Transition Validation","domain_realization":"Test whether candidate events correspond to observable changes in corpus relations and whether purported smooth changes survive alternative intervals and archive-composition checks."},{"archetype_element":"Hybrid Boundary Rule","domain_realization":"Discrete events annotate or segment a continuous trace only after boundary review; conventional decade or school labels do not reset the trace automatically."},{"archetype_element":"Approximation Error Check","domain_realization":"Compare hybrid, pure-stage, and pure-trend representations for altered document selection, unsupported discontinuities, missed event-linked changes, and interval-dependent contextual claims."},{"archetype_element":"Scale Shift Review","domain_realization":"Repeat summaries at document, annual, and multi-year resolutions to identify conclusions that appear only at one imposed temporal scale."}],"title":"Scale-Sensitive Periodization Ledger for Critical-Movement Histories","version":0}