{"abstention_reason":null,"arm":"SUBSTRATE_DIVERSE_P2","candidate_id":"multiple_testing_discipline__engineering_design__SUBSTRATE_DIVERSE_P2","cell_id":"multiple_testing_discipline__engineering_design","decision":"PROPOSAL","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","proposal":{"actors":["Welding-process development engineer","Production welder","Metallography technician","Mechanical-test technician","Independent qualification engineer","Pressure-vessel design authority"],"affected_objective":"Prevent a pressure-vessel weld procedure selected from many physical trials and specimen locations from entering production merely because its most favorable destructive-test results exceeded qualification limits.","arm":"SUBSTRATE_DIVERSE_P2","authority_safety":{"authorized_first_step":"The independent qualification engineer may conduct one shadow trial using paired discovery and fresh-lot confirmation specimens without changing the currently qualified weld procedure.","decision_authority":"Only the pressure-vessel design authority may approve production use after the independent qualification engineer completes the frozen fresh-lot destructive-test matrix.","excluded_actions":["Replacing the currently qualified production weld during the pilot","Opening or testing confirmation stock during discovery","Changing confirmation specimen locations, conditioning, loads, or acceptance limits after selecting a candidate","Discarding failed discovery coupons or unreported specimen results","Treating multiplicity control as a substitute for code compliance, welder qualification, fracture assessment, or material traceability"],"halt_rollback":"If confirmation stock is exposed, specimen identity is lost, a coupon is substituted, or the frozen test matrix changes after candidate selection, halt qualification, mark the confirmation invalid, retain all fractured material and records, and continue using the currently qualified procedure."},"baseline":"Conventional weld development may trial many combinations of filler, current, travel speed, preheat, interpass temperature, joint preparation, and post-weld treatment, then cut tensile, bend, impact, hardness, or metallography specimens from several locations. The best-performing procedure and specimen set can dominate the qualification package even when the full number of physical trials and sampled locations is not considered in its evidentiary status.","candidate_id":"multiple_testing_discipline__engineering_design__SUBSTRATE_DIVERSE_P2","causal_chain":["Developers fabricate and destructively inspect many weld procedures, specimen types, cut locations, orientations, conditioning temperatures, and retest combinations.","Material heterogeneity, weld-to-weld variation, specimen placement, and measurement scatter give each physical test another opportunity to produce an unusually favorable result.","Selecting the procedure with the best observed collection of results enriches for favorable physical realizations, even if every individual test followed its ordinary acceptance limit.","If that selected result is treated as an independently demonstrated property, the procedure's toughness and strength are overstated.","The intervention confines discovery testing to a visibly serialized specimen rack while keeping separate material stock physically inaccessible and untested.","After one candidate and its acceptance matrix are frozen, an independent welder creates a new confirmation lot from the untouched stock, producing fresh weld realizations rather than reusing favorable discovery material.","Independent destructive instruments measure every predefined specimen from the confirmation lot, including failures and inconvenient locations.","Only a candidate passing the complete fresh-lot matrix receives confirmed status; otherwise the apparent discovery is rejected without affecting the qualified production procedure."],"cell_id":"multiple_testing_discipline__engineering_design","consequence":"A search-favored weld procedure could reach vessel production with less toughness, ductility, or defect tolerance than its development results imply, increasing the risk of rework, rejected vessels, in-service cracking, or loss of pressure-boundary integrity.","diversity_from_prior_proposals":"P1 governs promotion of a simulated composite-bracket geometry using sealed model inputs. This proposal instead addresses selection bias among physically fabricated welds and specimen locations, and its essential intervention is fresh material conversion followed by independent destructive measurement. It neither repairs the bracket gate nor reuses its simulated structural-margin pathway.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","intervention":"Install a Paired-Lot Destructive Confirmation Cell for weld-procedure development. Before trials, allocate a serialized discovery rack and a mechanically locked confirmation-stock cage containing unused plate, filler, and specimen blanks from identified lots. Define one family encompassing all candidate procedures, destructive-test types, specimen locations, orientations, temperatures, retests, and acceptance claims. Every discovery coupon and broken specimen remains in its numbered rack position, making attempted physical looks inspectable. Results from this rack can nominate only an exploratory procedure. After nomination, freeze the welding parameters, specimen map, conditioning, machine fixtures, loads, and pass limits. The independent qualification engineer then unlocks the untouched stock; a different qualified welder makes a fresh confirmation lot, and calibrated tensile, bend, impact, hardness, and metallographic instruments test every frozen position. Promotion requires the entire predeclared confirmation matrix to pass. Digital records may mirror specimen identities and readings, but physical separation of untouched stock, independent remanufacture, retained specimens, and fresh destructive measurement supply the essential evidentiary effect.","mechanism_mapping":[{"counterfactual_removal":"Without a complete family definition, developers could omit unfavorable specimen locations, retests, or procedure variants when judging how broadly they searched.","mechanism_slug":"claim_registry","role":"Maps each claimed weld property to all candidate procedures, test types, cut locations, orientations, conditioning states, and retests in the same discovery family."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without the locked untouched stock, favorable discovery material could be resampled and mislabeled as independent confirmation.","mechanism_slug":"holdout_validation","role":"Physically reserves unused plate, filler, and specimen blanks until after procedure selection and acceptance criteria are frozen."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without a separately fabricated lot, confirmation could reproduce only another cut from the unusually favorable discovery weld.","mechanism_slug":"replication_study","role":"Creates an independent weld realization with untouched materials, a reset fabrication setup, and a different qualified welder."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without the mandatory destructive follow-up, the most favorable discovery coupon could remain sufficient for production approval.","mechanism_slug":"confirmatory_follow_up","role":"Requires the nominated procedure to pass the complete tensile, bend, impact, hardness, and metallographic matrix on the fresh lot."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without advance commitment, specimen positions or limits could be changed after the fresh lot's behavior became visible.","mechanism_slug":"preregistration","role":"Freezes the procedure, specimen map, test conditions, fixtures, and acceptance limits before the confirmation cage is opened."}],"nearest_rivals":["Design of experiments: can organize the weld-parameter search but does not itself provide untouched physical evidence after the best procedure has been selected.","Ordinary weld-procedure qualification: may prescribe destructive tests, but it does not necessarily account for the larger family of failed procedures, sampled locations, and discretionary retests that produced the nominee.","Statistical process control: monitors production stability after a procedure is chosen rather than correcting the credibility of a procedure selected from many development trials.","Redundant nondestructive examination: can corroborate defect detection in the same weld but does not independently confirm bulk mechanical properties on a fresh fabrication lot."],"negative_tests":{"intervention_falsifier":"The intervention fails if confirmation specimens were exposed or sampled during discovery, the fresh lot is not an independent fabrication, predefined specimens disappear, or candidates receive different post-selection test matrices or acceptance limits.","problem_falsifier":"The multiplicity diagnosis is falsified if one procedure, one complete specimen map, and one acceptance matrix were fixed before fabrication and evaluated once without alternative locations, retests, omitted outcomes, or competing procedures.","risks":["Discovery work conducted outside the serialized rack","Correlation between discovery and confirmation caused by shared material defects or equipment bias","Damage or substitution of locked confirmation stock","Overly severe confirmation requirements that reject usable procedures","False confidence despite unrepresentative joint geometry, invalid test calibration, or inadequate fracture mechanics","Pressure to reinterpret a failed matrix as a partial pass"],"strongest_counterevidence":"A traceable record showing that the procedure and complete specimen matrix were fixed before any welding, followed by one untouched independently fabricated lot with all results reported, would show that selection across many physical trials is not the operative credibility problem."},"next_evidence_step":"Run a non-production shadow comparison during one planned weld-development campaign: retain all discovery coupons in a 20-position serialized rack, lock material for one fresh confirmation lot, nominate one exploratory procedure, freeze its complete test matrix, fabricate the independent lot, and compare the baseline qualification conclusion with the fresh-lot conclusion. Keep the existing qualified procedure in service regardless of the pilot result.","observable_state":"Reviewers can inspect the occupied discovery rack, serialized failed and passed coupons, retained fractured specimens, an unbroken confirmation-cage seal, material heat identifiers, the frozen specimen-cut map, untouched stock release record, fresh-lot weld identification, calibrated instrument outputs for every predefined test, and the final exploratory, confirmed, rejected, or invalid status.","prior_art_status":"UNSEARCHED","problem":"During pressure-vessel weld-procedure development, engineers may fabricate many parameter combinations and cut multiple destructive specimens from different weld regions, orientations, and retest locations. Because physical weld heterogeneity and test scatter create numerous chances for an unusually favorable result, the procedure with the best observed strength, bend, impact, hardness, and metallography results can appear qualified even when its advantage is a product of selection across many attempted physical tests.","proposal_index":2,"remaining_contrastive_claim":"Unlike simulation gating, experiment planning, or routine qualification, the proposal changes credibility by physically withholding material from the entire discovery search, independently recreating the selected weld, and destructively measuring a frozen specimen matrix before production eligibility.","revision_record":{"claim_changes":["Initial version limits the claim to evidentiary promotion of a weld procedure selected from multiple physical trials and specimen locations.","No novelty, prevalence, regulatory-compliance, or quantitative safety-effect claim is made."],"conceptual_changes":["The archetype is realized through physical specimen families, untouched material, independent fabrication, and destructive measurement rather than a computational search gate.","Multiplicity arises from heterogeneous weld realizations and discretionary specimen sampling, not alternative bracket simulations."],"evidence_changes":["No external evidence or prior-art search was used.","Physical-seal, specimen-retention, independence, and single-predefinition checks provide observable falsifiers."],"operational_changes":["The pilot preserves the qualified production procedure and confines authority to a reversible shadow trial.","Stock custody, fabrication, destructive testing, promotion, halt, and rollback responsibilities are explicitly separated."],"parent_version":null,"progress_targets_addressed":["Material independence from P1","Measurement-instrumentation primary substrate","Complete multiple-testing mapping","Observable physical discovery history","Bounded reversible pilot","Explicit authority and rollback"]},"schema_version":1,"structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"Define the claim family","domain_realization":"Enumerate all weld procedures, properties, specimen types, cut locations, orientations, conditioning temperatures, retests, and acceptance claims capable of supporting production qualification."},{"archetype_element":"Inventory attempted looks","domain_realization":"Assign each fabricated coupon and destructive specimen a retained numbered rack position, with empty, broken, failed, and passed positions all visible."},{"archetype_element":"Set the error-risk policy","domain_realization":"Treat a false pressure-boundary qualification as sufficiently consequential that no procedure selected from the discovery rack is production-ready."},{"archetype_element":"Apply a multiplicity-aware rule","domain_realization":"Require the selected procedure to pass a frozen, complete destructive-test matrix on an independently welded lot made from physically withheld stock."},{"archetype_element":"Label claim status","domain_realization":"Mark a procedure as exploratory after discovery and as confirmed, rejected, or invalid only after the fresh-lot matrix."},{"archetype_element":"Confirm before costly action","domain_realization":"Withhold production eligibility until independent fabrication and destructive measurement of the confirmation lot are complete."},{"archetype_element":"Preserve the discovery record","domain_realization":"Retain the serialized coupon rack, fractured specimens, stock seals, material identifiers, frozen cut map, instrument outputs, failures, and status history."}],"substrate_contract":{"counterfactual_independence":"If databases, software, algorithms, dashboards, training, incentives, and organizational routing are removed, the locked untouched stock still cannot enter discovery; the selected procedure can still be independently rewelded; and calibrated physical instruments can still destroy and measure the frozen confirmation specimens. Those material operations create the fresh evidence. Records and authority rules support traceability and prevent misuse but do not generate the essential confirmation effect.","forbidden_channel_audit":"No software thresholding, model, optimization algorithm, digital controller, registry, incentive, training program, or review workflow supplies the claimed reduction in selection-induced false qualification. The essential channels are spatial separation of stock, mechanical sealing, material transformation by independent welding, specimen retention, and destructive measurement of fresh physical samples.","primary_allowed_process":"MEASUREMENT_INSTRUMENTATION"},"title":"Paired-Lot Destructive Confirmation Cell","version":0},"schema_version":1}