{"candidates":[{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C01","confidence":0.98,"reason":"The scenario does not establish persistence beyond reliable observation or confusability of absence with termination.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C01R01L01","evidence":"No evidence addresses entity persistence relative to observation reliability.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C01R01L02","evidence":"No evidence addresses distinguishing temporary absence from termination.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C01R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C02","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario concerns incident classifications, not identifiable positions with changing occupants.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C02R01L01","evidence":"No host position or occupant turnover is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C02R01L02","evidence":"No site constraints independent of occupants are described in this sense.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C02R01L03","evidence":"No vacancy, assignment, release, or turnover states are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C02R01L04","evidence":"No occupant-to-site assignment or fit is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C02R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C03","confidence":0.99,"reason":"No coordinated reduced-mode return or staged reentry is established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C03R01L01","evidence":"Intermittent failures are described, but not units isolated or held in reduced mode.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C03R01L02","evidence":"No local readiness and inter-unit return dependencies are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C03R01L03","evidence":"No premature reentry risk is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C03R01L04","evidence":"No all-at-once return test is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C03R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C04","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario does not establish durable retention of a newly encoded trace.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C04R01L01","evidence":"No newly encoded lesson, skill, or representation requiring later retention is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C04R01L02","evidence":"No comparison between immediate and durable recall or performance is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C04R01L03","evidence":"No retention trace vulnerability to the listed interference mechanisms is established.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C04R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"SATISFIED","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario explicitly describes non-one-to-one category translation and exclusion of insider records based solely on source position, with an official account that loses locally important distinctions.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R01L01","evidence":"Multiple depot terms fall within one engineering class, while “ghost occupancy” maps to three engineering classes depending on telemetry.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R01L02","evidence":"The official standardized analysis merges depot distinctions that maintainers say require sharply different diagnostic judgments.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R01","route_status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R02L01","evidence":"Multiple depot terms fall within one engineering class, while “ghost occupancy” maps to three engineering classes depending on telemetry.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R02L02","evidence":"The analytics lead excludes depot logs because they were written by repair personnel, while accepting external-origin records.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R02","route_status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R03L01","evidence":"Multiple depot terms fall within one engineering class, while “ghost occupancy” maps to three engineering classes depending on telemetry.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R03L02","evidence":"The same incidents receive depot classifications tied to diagnostic practice and engineering classifications tied to telemetry and standardized fault types.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R03","route_status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R04L01","evidence":"Multiple depot terms fall within one engineering class, while “ghost occupancy” maps to three engineering classes depending on telemetry.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R04L02","evidence":"The official analysis excludes depot logs and reports standardized classes while failing to preserve distinctions maintainers say matter for diagnosis.","status":"SATISFIED"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C05R04","route_status":"SATISFIED"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C06","confidence":0.99,"reason":"No repeatedly activated stable trace and in-activation correction are established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C06R01L01","evidence":"No stored pattern is described as repeatedly retrieved and guiding later behavior.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C06R01L02","evidence":"No stable trace or habit reasserting itself when cued is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C06R01L03","evidence":"No recognizable activation moment of the specified kind is established.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C06R01L04","evidence":"No correction introduced while an active target pattern is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C06R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario contains no evidence of saddle-like stability dynamics or basin-boundary decisions.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L01","evidence":"No locally balanced state and directional stability are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L02","evidence":"No axis-specific perturbation amplification or dissipation is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L03","evidence":"No knife-edge choice between futures is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L04","evidence":"No traversal of an unstable region toward a desired regime is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L05","evidence":"No optimization or learning stall near a saddle is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L06","evidence":"No prior stability intervention is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01L07","evidence":"No evidence compares response sign or basin distance with perturbation magnitude.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C07R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C08","confidence":0.99,"reason":"No delayed or distance-attenuated signal-to-endpoint relationship is established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C08R01L01","evidence":"No decision is described as depending on a signal surviving delay or distance.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C08R01L02","evidence":"No weak-region or later-time receiver effect loss is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C08R01L03","evidence":"No differential signal-component or receiver-group decay is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C08R01L04","evidence":"No source-versus-endpoint degradation comparison is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C08R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09","confidence":0.94,"reason":"Recurring failures across depots are established, but the remaining workaround, compliance, and safety-critical adaptation conditions are not.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01L01","evidence":"The operator is reviewing intermittent signaling failures across three depots.","status":"SATISFIED"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01L02","evidence":"No official compliance requirement is described as making important work impossible or harmful.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01L03","evidence":"No unauthorized workaround with material value is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01L04","evidence":"The lead excludes logs, but no proposal to suppress a recurring workaround is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01L05","evidence":"No uneven spread of informal exceptions is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01L06","evidence":"The railway context may be safety-relevant, but undocumented operational adaptations are not established.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C09R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario does not establish a delayed feedback relation or unknown operative recurrence lag.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10R01L01","evidence":"No present outcome is described as returning in response to earlier states or interventions.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10R01L02","evidence":"No delayed feedback relation or resulting oscillation or resistance is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10R01L03","evidence":"No record of recurrent patterns with an unknown operative lag is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10R01L04","evidence":"No attempt to distinguish recurrence from seasonality, measurement delay, or shared cause is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10R01L05","evidence":"No alternative memory horizons are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C10R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C11","confidence":0.99,"reason":"No reference operating state, measurable deviation trajectory, or incremental correction is established.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C11R01L01","evidence":"No reference state, setpoint, target allocation, service band, or operating envelope is stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C11R01L02","evidence":"No measurable deviation relative to such a reference is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C11R01L03","evidence":"No small trajectory-changing intervention is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C11R01L04","evidence":"No accumulating minor deviations are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C11R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C12","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario does not establish explicit output acceptance requirements, tolerance variation, or an escaped defect.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C12R01L01","evidence":"No explicit output safety, functional, contractual, regulatory, or interoperability requirement is stated.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C12R01L02","evidence":"No declared acceptance tolerances or process variation beyond them are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C12R01L03","evidence":"No escaped defect and downstream harm, rework, delay, or trust loss are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C12R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]},{"best_route_status":"INCOMPLETE","candidate_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13","confidence":0.99,"reason":"The scenario concerns competing classifications but does not establish the required history-preserving, event-oriented record properties.","route_assessments":[{"condition_assessments":[{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01L01","evidence":"No need to explain, audit, recover, or decide based on the path by which present state arose is established.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01L02","evidence":"No independent entity-centric records drifting, overwriting history, or needing reconciliation are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01L03","evidence":"No corrections, late evidence, retractions, or reinterpretations requiring preservation of prior record states are described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01L04","evidence":"No recurring participants, roles, locations, and transformations that fail as static attributes are established.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01L05","evidence":"No partial, source-local, uncertain, or causally distinct temporal ordering is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"},{"condition_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01L06","evidence":"No rebuildable derived current-state view is described.","status":"UNKNOWN"}],"route_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424C13R01","route_status":"INCOMPLETE"}]}],"opaque_case_id":"E14Q8F8E5AC3F424"}