{
  "example_kind": "original synthetic manual planning case",
  "slug": "forecast-horizon-unit-check",
  "title": "Match a forecast to its decision horizon",
  "scenario": "Synthetic planning case: A proposal predicts two days for the next individual proof. A stakeholder asks whether a three-proof batch plus its receiving review will be ready in two days; no joint schedule or other durations are supplied.",
  "layout": "protocol",
  "dataset": {
    "heading": "Inspect the invented case records",
    "headers": [
      "Question",
      "Available prediction",
      "Missing conditions"
    ],
    "rows": [
      [
        "Next individual proof",
        "2 days",
        "Supplied target only"
      ],
      [
        "Three-proof batch",
        "No joint prediction",
        "Other durations, overlap and resources"
      ],
      [
        "Batch plus receiving review",
        "No endpoint prediction",
        "Review duration and acceptance gate"
      ]
    ]
  },
  "derivation": "Even 3×2=6 days would introduce extra identical-duration and serial-execution assumptions. Neither two nor six is established for the requested endpoint by the supplied next-item forecast.",
  "result": "The next-proof forecast does not answer the batch-and-review question. Define the requested endpoint and collect the missing joint schedule before transferring the number or its confidence label.",
  "boundary": "This audits the forecast’s decision unit and horizon before reusing it for a larger endpoint.",
  "limitations": "A point prediction and its probability label cannot be transported to another horizon or unit without justification.",
  "sources": [
    "forecast"
  ],
  "tasks": [
    [
      "Name the requested receiving endpoint",
      "Stakeholder lead",
      "The question concerns three proofs plus review, not only the next proof."
    ],
    [
      "Inspect the forecast target",
      "Evaluation owner",
      "The recorded two-day number applies to one specific individual target."
    ],
    [
      "Build an eligible endpoint model",
      "Planner",
      "Missing durations, dependencies, resources and review gate are provided before a batch claim."
    ]
  ],
  "faqs": [
    [
      "Can I multiply the next-item number by three?",
      "Only under additional explicit duration and sequencing assumptions; any confidence claim still needs its own model."
    ],
    [
      "Can parallel work make the batch faster?",
      "Possibly, if inputs and eligible resources support it. The current prediction does not provide those facts."
    ]
  ],
  "method_references": [
    {
      "id": "forecast",
      "title": "Forecasting: Principles and Practice — accuracy",
      "url": "https://otexts.com/fpp3/accuracy.html",
      "scope": "Genuine held-out forecast and point-error evaluation context. Binary scoring examples use their own explicit toy definitions; no real task model is validated."
    }
  ]
}