Worked example: event support

A science narrative says: “The failed experiment forced the theory to change.” Compare the observed result with the prediction and alternatives: was a consequence refuted, an auxiliary assumption questioned, or a replacement supported? The repair should say which of those happened.

NarrativeEventSupportRecord@ExperimentTension:
  narrativeRenderingRef: ScienceStory@v1
  eventOrMechanismClaim: failed measurement challenged the prior mechanism hypothesis
  sourceStructureRef: measurement record, model expectation, uncertainty interval, alternative explanations
  relationStrength: observed mismatch plus mechanism hypothesis, not proof of forced theory change
  reconstructionTarget: reader can distinguish observed result, hypothesis pressure, and later evidence
  overclaimRisk: "forced", "proved", "settled", and "therefore" make the relation too strong
  sourceReturnCondition: return to the measurement and model assumptions when a stronger conclusion is needed

Before:

The experiment failed, so the old theory collapsed.

After:

The measured value lay outside the range predicted under these assumptions. The discrepancy calls for examining the mechanism model and the measurement assumptions; this experiment does not yet distinguish the proposed replacements.

The repaired passage retains the surprising result and the next research question, while distinguishing the mismatch from the still-undecided explanation.