{"cases":[{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E14A034__DIRECT","case_type":"DIRECT_POSITIVE","domain":"Automated container-terminal crane positioning","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":null,"remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement presents symptoms, operating constraints, and consequences without proposing equipment, procedures, or corrective architecture.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"ext001_absolute_acquisition_incremental_tracking_a01","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"The controller observes precise movement pulses but, following power loss or pulse loss, cannot determine which physical rail coordinate the crane occupies."}],"scenario_text":"A container terminal uses a rail-mounted gantry crane whose controller counts motion pulses to follow trolley travel with millimeter precision. During an uninterrupted shift, commanded moves and pulse counts agree closely enough for smooth automated handling. The controller, however, starts with only its retained count, not a verified physical coordinate. After a recent power interruption, technicians found that the saved value could refer to several trolley locations because the carriage had coasted while control power was absent. Similar uncertainty appears when wheel slip occurs in heavy rain or electrical noise suppresses a few pulses. Subsequent counts accurately report further travel but preserve the unknown offset, so the displayed coordinate can remain consistently wrong. Operators then cannot safely authorize automatic pickup near stacked containers, even though the motion signal looks clean and repeatable. The terminal needs dependable high-resolution positioning across long travel while limiting the cost and maintenance burden of instrumenting every point along the rail.","scenario_title":"Crane Coordinate Uncertainty After Interrupted Travel","vocabulary_separation_audit":"Uses physical motion, rail, carriage, pulse, and coordinate terminology specific to industrial positioning."},{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E14A034__TRANSFER","case_type":"TRANSFER_POSITIVE","domain":"Festival-site reusable cup inventory accounting","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":null,"remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement identifies accounting ambiguity and operational constraints but names no corrective mechanism or recommended intervention.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"ext001_absolute_acquisition_incremental_tracking_a01","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"Checkout and return events precisely describe changes, yet an unknown opening quantity, an outage, or unrecorded transfers leaves the current cup total indeterminate."}],"scenario_text":"A three-day music festival tracks reusable cups at twelve beverage tents. Each checkout subtracts one cup from a tent’s ledger, and every accepted return adds one, giving managers a detailed view of traffic while the event feed is complete. On opening morning, however, several tents began trading before their initial crate quantities were entered. Later, a wireless outage delayed some transactions, and staff moved sleeves of cups between tents without all transfers reaching the central service. Once connectivity returned, new sales and returns were recorded accurately, but the dashboard could only apply those changes to an uncertain starting total. Two different physical stock levels therefore produced the same subsequent event history. Managers cannot tell whether a low displayed balance represents genuine depletion or an earlier missing entry, complicating deposit reconciliation and late-night replenishment. Full manual counts at every tent are disruptive during peak queues, yet finance requires a defensible quantity for each location after outages and shift changes.","scenario_title":"Cup Ledgers Lose Their Starting Point","vocabulary_separation_audit":"Uses hospitality inventory, deposits, tents, crates, checkouts, and returns, avoiding the industrial positioning vocabulary of the direct case."},{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E14A034__NEAR_MISS","case_type":"ONE_LITERAL_NEAR_MISS","domain":"Stadium reusable cup inventory accounting","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":"ext001_absolute_acquisition_incremental_tracking_a01","remedy_leakage_audit":"Existing facts about the accounting environment are described only to establish the contradiction; no new intervention is suggested or recommended.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"ext001_absolute_acquisition_incremental_tracking_a01","intended_status":"CONTRADICTED","scenario_evidence":"Every service period has a verified opening count, and a durable, sequence-checked event record restores one unique current quantity after disconnection or restart."}],"scenario_text":"A football stadium tracks reusable cups at fourteen concession stands through checkout, return, and inter-stand transfer records. The operation has comparable volume and reconciliation pressure to a large festival, including peak queues, temporary network disconnections, shift changes, and thousands of deposits. Unlike a ledger that can lose its starting point, each stand’s service period begins with a witnessed physical count recorded before trading is enabled. Transactions are stored locally with sequence numbers until acknowledged, and closing checks confirm that no numbered record is absent. After a terminal restart or communications outage, the witnessed opening quantity and complete ordered history always yield one uniquely determined current balance; staff have verified that delayed records and restarts do not create competing totals. The remaining complaint concerns reporting latency: locally stored transactions can take twenty minutes to appear on the central dashboard during network congestion. Stand supervisors therefore see an old but still determinate balance, while finance later receives the same unambiguous quantity once queued records arrive.","scenario_title":"Delayed Stadium Balances Without Quantity Ambiguity","vocabulary_separation_audit":"Retains the transfer case’s concession-inventory setting and workload while explicitly distinguishing reporting delay from uncertainty about the actual ledger total."}],"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp14_applicability_retrieval40_20260813","sample_id":"E14A034","schema_version":1}