research-document RFR-13939F9B
Map boundary conditions and failure regimes: Extension Ratios, Area, and Salience
RFR-13939F9B — Map boundary conditions and failure regimes: Extension Ratios, Area, and Salience
Research opportunity
Map boundary conditions and failure regimes for the claims or recommendations in “Extension Ratios, Area, and Salience.”
Background
The originating artifact is accepted by the repository publishing inventory with status “computational-pilot-complete-human-study-pending.” Its Question and falsifier section provides the immediate evidence boundary.
Evidence trace
- Origin document: content/projects/itten-color-contrasts/experiment-report/EX-ITTEN-001-extension-area-salience.md
- Section:
Question and falsifier - Specific assumption challenged: The source's treatment in “Question and falsifier” is sufficiently supported for its intended scope.
- Supporting evidence excerpt: “Do fixed color-area ratios predict perceived balance after luminance, chroma, position, and semantic priority are controlled? The fixed-ratio account fails if those variables explain balance and attention better than complementary area ratio, or if the preferred ratio changes materially by task or observer.”
- Reason this opportunity exists: The conditions under which the documented recommendation weakens, reverses, or creates a competing cost.
Unknowns
- The conditions under which the documented recommendation weakens, reverses, or creates a competing cost.
Dependencies
Suggested REP and methodology
- Suggested REP:
REP-EX-ITTEN-001-BOUNDARY - Methodology: Use a factorial stress test across task, user, context, device, and consequence variables; model interactions rather than relying on aggregate means.
- Expected outputs: Boundary-condition matrix, failure taxonomy, interaction model, and revised scope statement.
- Success criteria: At least one credible failure regime is tested and the valid operating envelope is quantitatively described.
- Recommended agent:
experimentation-research-agent - Estimated effort: Medium
- Expected knowledge gained: The conditions under which the documented recommendation weakens, reverses, or creates a competing cost.
Evaluation
| Dimension | Score (1–5) |
|---|---|
| Knowledge gain | 4 |
| Potential impact | 5 |
| Cross-project reuse | 5 |
| Scientific importance | 5 |
| Dependency cost | 5 |
| Implementation difficulty | 4 |
| Frontier score | 491 |
Confidence in this opportunity: moderate. Status: Open.