{"cases":[{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E15A033__DIRECT","case_type":"DIRECT_POSITIVE","domain":"Professional-services document management","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":null,"remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement reports perceptions, usage patterns, and audit findings without proposing any corrective action.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"b042_a13_c1","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"Employees avoid a little-used portal after hostile rumors and one early incident, while subsequent security and compliance reviews find no continuing defect or risk."}],"scenario_text":"A regional accounting firm introduced a secure client-document portal eighteen months ago, but most senior staff still exchange files through older channels. Many employees first heard about the portal when colleagues circulated stories about an unrelated company backed by the same investment group, describing every product connected with the group as exploitative and unsafe. Few critics have logged into the portal more than once. Their main firsthand reference is a launch-week incident in which a permissions setting briefly hid several folders from their owners, although no documents were exposed or lost. Since then, independent security reviews have found the system compliant with the firm’s access-control and retention requirements, and internal monitoring has identified no ongoing confidentiality problem. Nevertheless, managers routinely warn new hires that the portal is risky, and teams interpret ordinary login prompts as signs that it cannot be trusted. The resulting avoidance has persisted despite the absence of a documented current danger.","scenario_title":"The Portal Nobody Trusts","vocabulary_separation_audit":"This case uses enterprise software, compliance, permissions, and document-handling language, distinct from the food-production vocabulary of the transfer cases."},{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E15A033__TRANSFER","case_type":"TRANSFER_POSITIVE","domain":"Municipal school food procurement","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":null,"remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement describes the dispute and available evidence without suggesting exposure, education, tasting, or any other response.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"b042_a13_c1","intended_status":"SATISFIED","scenario_evidence":"Families reject an unfamiliar kelp product after disgust-laden publicity and one poor early batch, although inspections and repeated testing show no current safety problem."}],"scenario_text":"A coastal school district has received persistent complaints about locally produced kelp crackers included in cafeteria lunches. Most objecting families have never bought or tasted a current batch. Their impressions come largely from neighborhood posts calling farmed seaweed “harbor sludge” and linking the producer to photographs of unrelated beach pollution. The crackers also acquired a poor reputation after the first delivery arrived stale and excessively salty because a distributor stored it incorrectly. That shipment was discarded, and later lots have met the district’s nutrition limits and passed routine screening for pathogens, heavy metals, and excess iodine. Health inspectors have found no active sanitation violation at the processing facility, and illness reports among students do not differ between days when the crackers are served and other lunch days. Even so, parents continue to describe the product as inherently contaminated, students often throw sealed packages away, and cafeteria staff report that rumors about the original shipment dominate conversations more than the results from current lots.","scenario_title":"The Rejected Kelp Crackers","vocabulary_separation_audit":"The scenario shifts from office technology to coastal food production, school meals, inspections, nutrition, and contamination rumors, with substantially different surface terminology."},{"alternative_route_blocks":[],"case_id":"E15A033__NEAR_MISS","case_type":"ONE_LITERAL_NEAR_MISS","domain":"Municipal school food procurement","intended_route_id":"B1","omitted_condition_id":"b042_a13_c1","remedy_leakage_audit":"The statement presents confirmed conditions and stakeholder behavior but does not recommend a recall, reformulation, procurement change, or other intervention.","route_evidence":[{"condition_id":"b042_a13_c1","intended_status":"CONTRADICTED","scenario_evidence":"The community is familiar with the crackers, neutral communications predominate, and repeated independent measurements confirm a continuing present health risk in distributed lots."}],"scenario_text":"A coastal school district is facing sustained parent objections to kelp crackers that have appeared on cafeteria menus for four years. Families are familiar with the product, and surveys show that most objecting households have tasted it multiple times. District notices have described the crackers in neutral terms, without pollution imagery or alarming claims, and parents say their concern is not based on the product’s novelty or on a single memorable shipment. During each of the past six weeks, independent laboratories have measured iodine concentrations above the district’s medical threshold in sealed packages drawn from separate production lots. The health department confirmed the sampling method and traced the readings to inconsistent dosing during processing. Several currently distributed lots remain within their printed shelf life and carry labels understating their iodine content. School nurses have also documented thyroid-related symptoms in three students whose clinicians identified frequent consumption as a relevant factor. Complaints therefore center on a repeatedly measured, continuing defect in products still being served, rather than rumor, unfamiliarity, or an isolated past event.","scenario_title":"A Continuing Problem in Current Lots","vocabulary_separation_audit":"The near miss retains the transfer case’s school-meal, kelp-processing, laboratory, and community-dispute vocabulary while changing only the evidentiary basis for avoidance."}],"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp15_route_aware_retrieval40_20260814","sample_id":"E15A033","schema_version":1}