{"actors":["Athletes in a single training squad","Strength-and-conditioning coach","Sport scientist responsible for monitoring data","Team clinician for medical red flags","Head coach who retains session-plan authority"],"affected_objective":"Choose whether to retain, reduce, redirect, or defer an athlete's planned high-intensity training exposure without erasing gradual recovery trends or sudden state-changing events.","arm":"COMMON_P1","authority_safety":{"authorized_first_step":"The sport scientist may run a retrospective, shadow-mode comparison using already-authorized monitoring records; outputs cannot alter training, selection, or medical decisions.","decision_authority":"The head coach retains training-plan authority, the clinician retains medical and return-to-play authority, and the athlete may stop or decline activity regardless of the model output.","excluded_actions":["Automatic training restriction or clearance","Diagnosis, treatment, or return-to-play decisions","Overriding athlete-reported pain or clinician instructions","Using the output for selection, contracts, discipline, or compensation","Collecting new sensor or health data without existing consent and governance approval"],"halt_rollback":"Stop the evaluation if records lack valid consent, identities cannot be protected, event timestamps are unreliable, or outputs are used operationally; quarantine derived outputs and revert to the existing review process."},"baseline":"The current readiness review assigns a daily green, amber, or red label from a pre-session check and coach judgment, while workload trends are inspected separately as smooth summaries. The two representations have no explicit rule for reconciling gradual drift with sudden pain, illness, collision, or failed warm-up events.","candidate_id":"discrete_continuous_model_selection__sport_science__COMMON_P1","causal_chain":["The session-modification decision is defined before selecting a model form.","Within-athlete recovery and load indicators are treated as continuous trajectories because their direction and accumulation can matter within a readiness category.","Pain onset, illness report, collision, equipment failure, and inability to complete a standardized warm-up are represented as timestamped discrete events because they can change the applicable decision regime.","Explicit event boundaries prevent consequential jumps from being absorbed into daily averages.","Continuous values retained within each regime prevent adjacent athletes or observations from becoming falsely equivalent merely because they share a traffic-light label.","Sampling is aligned to the decision window using scheduled pre-session and post-warm-up observations plus event timestamps, without implying continuity where no observation exists.","A documented switching rule determines when an event suspends ordinary trajectory interpretation and routes the case to coach or clinician review.","Retrospective transition and boundary-case validation tests whether the hybrid representation better preserves the information needed to reconstruct authorized decisions."],"cell_id":"discrete_continuous_model_selection__sport_science","consequence":"A purely categorical view can create readiness cliffs and discard within-category direction, while a purely continuous summary can smooth away sudden events that should interrupt ordinary training interpretation; either mismatch can produce an unsupported session recommendation.","diversity_from_prior_proposals":"No comparison with prior proposals was performed under runtime isolation; this candidate is specifically centered on hybrid modeling of within-athlete recovery trajectories and state-changing training events.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","intervention":"Build a shadow-mode hybrid readiness representation for one squad: preserve selected within-athlete monitoring measures as continuous, time-stamped trajectories; record a small, predefined set of discrete state-changing events; define event start, confirmation, and closure boundaries; and specify that qualifying events suspend routine trajectory-based interpretation and route the case to human review. Display the continuous trajectory and event history separately rather than collapsing them into one readiness score.","mechanism_mapping":[{"counterfactual_removal":"Without the hybrid mechanism, either continuous trends or discrete interruptions must be discarded or reconciled informally.","mechanism_slug":"hybrid_discrete_continuous_model","role":"Combines gradual within-athlete recovery and load trajectories with discrete events that switch the applicable decision regime."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without cadence selection, observations may be too sparse to distinguish gradual drift from a change occurring during warm-up.","mechanism_slug":"sampling_interval_choice","role":"Aligns scheduled observations and event timestamps with the pre-session decision window."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without the audit, apparently useful displays could still miss short transitions or invent boundaries unsupported by the records.","mechanism_slug":"transition_resolution_audit","role":"Checks missed events, ambiguous event edges, unobserved intervals, and false category distinctions."}],"nearest_rivals":["A daily green-amber-red readiness classification with fixed category boundaries","A continuous composite readiness score with no discrete event states","Coach-only session adjustment based on unstructured observation and conversation","Separate workload dashboards and incident logs with no explicit switching rule"],"negative_tests":{"intervention_falsifier":"Reject this intervention form if the hybrid representation does not reconstruct independently documented event timing and session-review decisions more faithfully than both the existing categories and a continuous-only shadow model, or if its boundary rules cannot be applied consistently by two reviewers.","problem_falsifier":"The inferred problem is unsupported if consequential session decisions in the bounded records depend only on smooth trajectories or only on discrete events, if existing categories preserve all decision-relevant variation, or if representation choice does not change any reviewed decision case.","risks":["Noisy or behavior-sensitive self-reports may create spurious events.","Missing observations may be mistaken for stable continuous change.","Event definitions may drift between staff or split one episode into multiple events.","A hybrid display may create false precision or automation bias.","Sensitive athlete monitoring data could be exposed or repurposed.","More detailed review could add staff burden without changing decisions."] ,"strongest_counterevidence":"The strongest counterevidence would be high agreement between the existing traffic-light process and independent retrospective adjudication across transition and boundary cases, with no additional decision-relevant information supplied by continuous trajectories or event timing."},"next_evidence_step":"Using a de-identified, already-authorized four-week record from one squad, have two reviewers independently timestamp predefined events and reconstruct session-review decisions while blinded to model outputs. Compare the existing categorical baseline, a continuous-only representation, and the proposed hybrid in shadow mode on event capture, boundary disagreements, missing-data cases, and decision reconstruction. Stop after the four-week sample; make no operational changes and report feasibility and discordant cases without estimating a training or injury effect.","observable_state":"For each athlete-session, the review shows time-stamped within-athlete trajectories for authorized recovery and workload measures, whether a predefined event occurred, the event's start and closure evidence, missing-observation intervals, the active interpretation regime, and the human decision recorded for that session.","prior_art_status":"UNSEARCHED","problem":"Same-day training-readiness reviews treat recovery as a coarse state even though fatigue and recovery can drift continuously, while separate trend summaries can hide abrupt pain, illness, collision, or warm-up failure events. Because the representations are not explicitly reconciled, coaches cannot audit whether a session modification followed a gradual trajectory, a discrete interruption, or an arbitrary category boundary.","proposal_index":1,"remaining_contrastive_claim":"Conditional on the records containing both gradual within-athlete change and decision-relevant interruptions, an explicitly governed hybrid representation should preserve the basis of session-review decisions better than either fixed readiness categories or a continuous-only score; the bounded comparison must determine whether that contrast survives observation.","revision_record":{"claim_changes":[],"conceptual_changes":[],"evidence_changes":[],"operational_changes":[],"parent_version":null,"progress_targets_addressed":["Generated the initial closed-book candidate with a concrete sport-science decision task.","Specified falsifiers, safeguards, rival representations, and a bounded shadow-mode evidence step."]},"schema_version":1,"structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"Decision Need","domain_realization":"Support an authorized human decision about modifying a planned high-intensity athlete-session."},{"archetype_element":"Process Change Signature","domain_realization":"Recovery and accumulated load vary gradually, while pain, illness, collision, and warm-up failure can occur as discrete interruptions."},{"archetype_element":"Granularity Choice","domain_realization":"Use continuous within-athlete trajectories at the available observation resolution plus a limited event vocabulary, rather than one composite tier."},{"archetype_element":"Step Boundary","domain_realization":"An event begins only with a timestamped athlete report, staff observation, or recorded test failure and closes only through a documented reviewer action or resolution record."},{"archetype_element":"Continuity Assumption","domain_realization":"Interpolation is allowed only between comparable scheduled observations when no qualifying event or missing-data interval intervenes."},{"archetype_element":"Measurement Resolution","domain_realization":"Use scheduled pre-session and post-warm-up observations and actual event timestamps; label all unobserved intervals."},{"archetype_element":"Hybrid Boundary Rule","domain_realization":"A qualifying event suspends ordinary continuous-trajectory interpretation and routes the case to coach or clinician review until documented closure."},{"archetype_element":"Transition Validation","domain_realization":"Compare modeled transitions with independently reviewed event records, boundary cases, and recorded session decisions."},{"archetype_element":"Approximation Error Check","domain_realization":"Inspect cases where smoothing hides an interruption and cases where categories separate otherwise similar continuous observations."},{"archetype_element":"Reversibility Check","domain_realization":"Run only in shadow mode so the representation can be withdrawn without changing athlete sessions or standing records."}],"title":"Hybrid Trajectory-and-Event Representation for Same-Day Training Readiness","version":0}