{"cases":[{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E14A017__DIRECT","case_type":"DIRECT_POSITIVE","domain":"Cybersecurity change management at a regional bank","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":null,"remedy_leakage_audit":"The problem statement reports the planning failure and operational stakes without proposing any corrective action, exercise, process, or intervention.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a1","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"The extortion group monitors the bank's rollout and can change lures, timing, and access methods after seeing defensive changes."},{"condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a2","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"Executives are prepared to approve the migration from checklist completion and a single favorable forecast that assumes attacker behavior remains unchanged."}],"scenario_text":"A regional bank plans to replace its remote-access gateway across 140 branches during one weekend. Executives expect the change to close the entry point used in a recent extortion attempt, and the migration packet shows every required control as compliant. Its risk estimate follows one sequence: employees reconnect, obsolete credentials fail, and attempted intrusions fall sharply. On that basis, the steering committee is prepared to approve the rollout with little discussion of what happens afterward. The criminal group behind the earlier attempt routinely monitors public outage reports, employee complaints, and underground access markets. Once it sees the gateway change, it could alter phishing themes, shift activity to vendors whose connections remain trusted, or delay action until help-desk exceptions accumulate. The bank's forecast nevertheless holds attacker timing, targets, and methods constant. A failed assumption could expose customer records or disrupt branch operations before the next scheduled executive review.","scenario_title":"Weekend Gateway Migration","vocabulary_separation_audit":"Uses banking, access-control, migration, and cyber-extortion vocabulary; it is distinct from the professional-sports language and setting of the transfer cases."},{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E14A017__TRANSFER","case_type":"TRANSFER_POSITIVE","domain":"Professional basketball playoff strategy","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":null,"remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement identifies uncertainty in the game plan but does not suggest drills, simulations, reviews, or strategic changes.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a1","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"The opposing coaching staff can recognize the coverage during the game and alter screens, spacing, matchups, and substitutions on later possessions."},{"condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a2","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"Coaches are leaning toward approval based on a narrow set of favorable video possessions and an assumed unchanged opponent rotation."}],"scenario_text":"A professional basketball team is finalizing its defensive plan for the opening game of a playoff series. Coaches want to trap the opposing point guard near midcourt, expecting hurried passes and late-clock shots. The plan has looked convincing in selected video clips, and the staff is leaning toward approval because the opponent used the same rotation and spacing throughout its last three games. The forecast effectively ends after the first successful trap. The opposing coaches, however, can identify the coverage within a few possessions and communicate changes during timeouts. They may move the center into a different screening angle, station a shooter behind the trap, alter substitution timing, or use the point guard as a decoy. Each change would affect the next defensive assignment and expose different matchups. Despite those possibilities, the internal briefing projects the opponent's recent habits straight through the game and treats an early turnover as confirmation that the full-night plan will work.","scenario_title":"Opening-Game Trap Plan","vocabulary_separation_audit":"Uses court positioning, rotations, possessions, and playoff coaching language, with no banking or cybersecurity terminology from the direct case."},{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E14A017__NEAR_MISS","case_type":"ONE_LITERAL_NEAR_MISS","domain":"Professional basketball playoff strategy","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a2","remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement describes the staff's existing evaluation behavior solely as negative evidence for the omitted condition; it offers no recommendation or proposed intervention.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a1","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"The rival can observe the press, communicate from the sideline, and change inbound formations, personnel, and tempo between possessions."},{"condition_id":"b002_a03_ao_a2","intended_status":"CONTRADICTED","scenario_evidence":"The staff explicitly rejects automatic approval, checklist sufficiency, one forecast, and favorable-film extrapolation; it requires several contingent sequences before deciding."}],"scenario_text":"A professional basketball team is deciding whether to use a full-court press in the deciding game of a playoff series. The rival can see the alignment before each inbound pass, relay instructions from the bench, change which player receives the ball, and substitute a taller passer after observing the first few possessions. Those reactions could create new fouling risks and leave different shooters unattended. Even so, the decision process is not built around an uncontested best-case sequence. The head coach has explicitly refused to approve the press merely because it worked in yesterday's short film segment or because every player can state the assigned coverage. Staff members have documented several plausible opponent responses, the team's follow-on choices, and the consequences of delayed substitutions. They remain divided because the estimates across those sequences are close, not because anyone assumes the rival will preserve its current formation. No compliance sign-off or single favorable forecast is being treated as sufficient for approval.","scenario_title":"Deciding-Game Press Decision","vocabulary_separation_audit":"Retains the transfer case's playoff setting, sequential coaching adjustments, and comparable tactical difficulty while using a different proposed coverage; it remains clearly separated from the direct case's cyber vocabulary."}],"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp14_applicability_retrieval40_20260813","sample_id":"E14A017","schema_version":1}