{"candidates":[{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01","confidence":0.96,"reason":"Recipe changes and historical reconstruction are explicit, but unrecognized version divergence and authority-versus-history distinction are not established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01R01L01","evidence":"Recipe changes are explicitly part of each lot history.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01R01L02","evidence":"Different message versions are mentioned, but actors relying on them without realizing it is not stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01R01L03","evidence":"Lot histories must be reconstructed after quality alerts, supporting an audit/quality need for historical interpretation.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01R01L04","evidence":"Older message versions, trust zones, access, capacity, and session timing affect whether exchanges work.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01R01L05","evidence":"The scenario does not state a need to distinguish current authority from historical record.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C01R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C02","confidence":0.94,"reason":"Later availability and vulnerability of trace records are supported, but the insufficiency of immediate performance for durable retention is not stated.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C02R01L01","evidence":"Records must remain available to reconstruct lot history within ten minutes of an alert.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C02R01L02","evidence":"No comparison between immediate recall/performance and durable retention is provided.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C02R01L03","evidence":"Changing message versions, throughput bursts, and maintenance-window session invalidation make end-to-end trace availability vulnerable.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C02R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C03","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Records cross system boundaries and systems require workable exchanges, but undocumented use and failure specifically caused by stripped context are not established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C03R01L01","evidence":"Lot records must move or be queried across four isolated systems, none of which provides the full production history.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C03R01L02","evidence":"The scenario does not state that consumers use artifacts without full documentation.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C03R01L03","evidence":"Failures are attributed to version, trust, access, throughput, and session issues, not explicitly to stripped contextual state.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C03R01L04","evidence":"The four systems require stable, usable exchanges despite differing versions, trust, access, and capacity constraints.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C03R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04","confidence":0.89,"reason":"Legacy components and inherited compatibility/trust risks are present, but the stated review focus and weak upstream ownership/provenance are not established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01L01","evidence":"The factory depends on legacy etchers and deposition tools as part of the current traceability system.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01L02","evidence":"No description of local review focus is given.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01L03","evidence":"Older message versions and certificates trusted only within one security zone show differing inherited conditions.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01L04","evidence":"Old message versions and inherited trust boundaries carry failure risk into current exchanges.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01L05","evidence":"Failure matters because quality-alert reconstruction and final-release traceability are impaired.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01L06","evidence":"Upstream ownership, support, provenance, and monitoring are not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C04R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C05","confidence":0.97,"reason":"Local measurements remain healthy while end-to-end traceability degrades, but signal delay/distance and differential decay are not established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C05R01L01","evidence":"No decision is stated to depend on a signal remaining usable after delay or distance.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C05R01L02","evidence":"No weak-region or later-time loss of intended signal effect is stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C05R01L03","evidence":"Differential signal-component or receiver-group decay is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C05R01L04","evidence":"Measurements are accurate within their own systems while fully traceable lot outcomes remain limited.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C05R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"SATISFIED","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C06","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario explicitly describes a fragmented multilayer traceability network, nonlinear gains from connecting exchanges, and non-topological usability constraints.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C06R01L01","evidence":"End-to-end lot history requires paths across production, inspection, execution, and archive systems.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C06R01L02","evidence":"Records explicitly form four isolated data islands.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C06R01L03","evidence":"One exchange adds under four points, while two raise traceability from 51% to 94%.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C06R01L04","evidence":"Version, certificate trust, permission, throughput, and session timing determine whether documented connections work.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C06R01","route_status":"SATISFIED"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C07","confidence":0.98,"reason":"The scenario does not establish production fingerprints or absent/manipulable metadata and custody records.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C07R01L01","evidence":"Tool readings are present, but repeated identifying features caused by production equipment or workflow are not stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C07R01L02","evidence":"Shipment records and other records exist; their absence, incompleteness, or manipulability is not established.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C07R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08","confidence":0.99,"reason":"No exact-identity migration or mapping properties are described.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08R01L01","evidence":"No migration or transition claiming exact preservation is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08R01L02","evidence":"No one-to-one distinguishable source-to-target mapping is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08R01L03","evidence":"No claim that every governed target is reached is given.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08R01L04","evidence":"Backward tracing of a produced target and round-trip mapping are not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08R01L05","evidence":"No requirement for an exact mapping through collection changes is stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C08R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09","confidence":0.94,"reason":"Credentials and accounts affect downstream access and are context-scoped, but attackability, repeatable evidence procedure, error balancing, and an explicit decision state are not fully established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L01","evidence":"Certificates, archive accounts, and recognized sessions are explicit credentials or identity-related mechanisms.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L02","evidence":"Archive-account access determines access to recipe fields.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L03","evidence":"The scenario does not state imitation, replay, theft, forgery, delegation, or confusion of a claim.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L04","evidence":"A repeatable admissible-evidence checking procedure is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L05","evidence":"The importance of balancing false acceptance and false rejection is not stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L06","evidence":"Certificate trust is scoped to a security zone and recognized sessions can be invalidated by maintenance windows.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01L07","evidence":"A legible decision state before downstream processing is not explicitly required.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C09R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10","confidence":0.95,"reason":"Records cross system/interface boundaries and auditability matters, but structured reconstruction, non-transferable ambient state, and a common flat representation are not fully established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10R01L01","evidence":"Records and messages must cross interfaces among isolated data islands.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10R01L02","evidence":"The need to reconstruct a structure rather than merely read a human-facing description is not stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10R01L03","evidence":"Pointers, ambient state, handles, defaults, or implicit relationships are not discussed.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10R01L04","evidence":"A common flat representation is not explicitly required.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10R01L05","evidence":"Reconstructing each lot's history after a quality alert establishes an auditability/traceability need.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C10R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario mentions certificates but does not establish distributed validation, privileged issuance, forgery risk, disclosure-free verification, or issuer-control escape.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11R01L01","evidence":"Many distributed verifiers are not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11R01L02","evidence":"Scarce or privileged issuance is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11R01L03","evidence":"The value or harm of forgery is not stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11R01L04","evidence":"Verification without privileged disclosure is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11R01L05","evidence":"An artifact traveling beyond issuer control is not established.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C11R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"CONTRADICTED","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario explicitly describes isolated data islands rather than a commingled information store.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12R01L01","evidence":"Records form four isolated data islands, explicitly opposing a commingled store.","status":"CONTRADICTED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12R01L02","evidence":"No use decision based on source class is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12R01L03","evidence":"Source cues being indirect or degraded is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12R01L04","evidence":"Fluency masquerading as evidence is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12R01L05","evidence":"Quality-alert traceability failures matter, but this does not establish the route's preceding conditions.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C12R01","route_status":"CONTRADICTED"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario describes integration testing and traceability, not creative candidate generation and independently checkable acceptance witnesses.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01L01","evidence":"Creative, combinatorial, heuristic, remote, proprietary, or expensive candidate generation is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01L02","evidence":"A stable checkable relation over candidates and bounded evidence is not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01L03","evidence":"No witness, proof, trace, schedule, bound, oracle, or replay record for cheaper checking is specified.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01L04","evidence":"Parallel candidate generators are not described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01L05","evidence":"No authoritative acceptance path is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01L06","evidence":"No evidence states that scarce review capacity is spent repeating generation.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4C13R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]}],"opaque_case_id":"E14Q7CEB2E28E4C4"}