---
conjecture: r3-b1-01
family: codex
model: "gpt-5.6-sol (codex-cli 0.144.0-alpha.4, ChatGPT-subscription auth)"
model_stamp_corrected: "2026-08-07 — archives were first written stamped gpt-5.5 by a runner bug (the stamper read config.toml's default instead of the -m flag actually passed). The calls themselves ran on gpt-5.6-sol throughout; only the label was wrong. Corrected in place, noted here rather than silently."
received: 2026-08-07
template: PROMPT_TEMPLATE_v1.md sha256 4344aabfacfe88362c56d89b6c89d594a7bf3a221e18a16b0e351482447e512f
rivals_parsed: 2
validation: VALID
---

{
  "rivals": [
    {
      "mechanism": "NAMAMI's underlying database or cataloguing workflow systematically omits manuscript dates, so the records are already undated before the list-page harvester sees them. A centralized metadata template or data-entry policy could impose this condition across every state.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "All training and holdout states share the same portal data model and cataloguing workflow, so an upstream absence of date values predicts exactly the observed source-wide zero without requiring any state-specific effects. Replication across states cannot distinguish this from an extraction-schema omission because both operate before the state facet is applied.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "centralized cataloguing and data-entry practice",
        "upstream metadata-field omission",
        "shared portal data model across geographic facets"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "For a stratified sample of manuscript identifiers from all 20 states, inspect the portal's source-of-truth records through detail endpoints, database exports, or administrative/API representations and measure whether any creation-date fields contain values before list-page extraction. The rival predicts that those native records have absent or blank dates and that correcting the list parser recovers essentially none; the stated mechanism predicts that date-bearing native values exist but are lost specifically at list enumeration.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "Date fields are absent or blank in the portal's pre-harvest source records across the sample, including after querying richer NAMAMI representations, so a parser capable of accepting dates still has no values to recover."
      }
    },
    {
      "mechanism": "A source-specific downstream normalization defect may overwrite, discard, or fail to join NAMAMI date values after enumeration, forcing date_precision to 'unknown' regardless of what the enumerator extracted. The causal failure would therefore be in normalization or record linkage, not in the list-page enumeration schema.",
      "why_it_explains_the_same_evidence": "Every state is processed through the same NAMAMI adapter and normalization path, so a single deterministic source-level defect would generate exactly 100% unknown dates in both training and holdout states. Additional states exercise the same defective code path and consequently provide no independent test of its location.",
      "named_confounds": [
        "source-specific ETL normalization defect",
        "date-field mapping or join failure",
        "shared-code pseudo-replication across states"
      ],
      "discriminating_test": {
        "description": "Replay raw NAMAMI records through the pipeline while logging the raw response, enumerator output, pre-normalization date value, and final date_precision. Then pass a controlled, valid date through the enumerator-output interface. The rival predicts that a date present before normalization is still discarded or converted to 'unknown'; under the stated mechanism, bypassing or repairing enumeration should allow the existing downstream stages to resolve it.",
        "computable_on_held_data": true,
        "what_result_favors_rival": "Real or controlled date values are present at the enumerator boundary but consistently disappear, fail to join, or become 'unknown' only during downstream normalization."
      }
    }
  ],
  "no_viable_rival": false,
  "notes": "The state holdouts strongly establish a portal-wide invariant, but because all states share the same portal and processing path, they do not localize that invariant to a particular stage."
}
