[
  {
    "id": "SIM-01",
    "profile": "Regulator",
    "persona": "Data protection policy lead",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Clarify how existing duties apply while generating evidence that can improve regulatory guidance.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "experimentation_testing",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "governance",
      "flexibility"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Public oversight tied to a regulatory learning question distinguishes a sandbox from testing alone.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory clarity",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-02",
    "profile": "AI developer",
    "persona": "Health AI startup engineer",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Find a predictable route to demonstrate safety without spending scarce resources on unclear requirements.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "experimentation_testing",
      "interaction_participants"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "flexibility",
      "innovation_stage",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox creates structured access to regulatory interpretation during a bounded experiment.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory clarity",
      "Innovation support"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory dialogue"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-03",
    "profile": "Researcher",
    "persona": "Public policy researcher",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Produce comparable evidence on which regulatory approaches work and for whom.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "evidence_generation",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "governance",
      "regulatory_operational"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The distinctive feature is a learning process that can inform regulatory decisions beyond one product.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-04",
    "profile": "Civil society",
    "persona": "Digital rights advocate",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Protect affected people and make the purpose, decisions and outcomes of experiments publicly accountable.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "other"
    ],
    "q2_other": "Public accountability",
    "q3": [
      "governance",
      "participants",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Regulatory supervision matters only if affected people have meaningful protections and a route to challenge decisions.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Rights and safeguards",
      "Public accountability"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Rights and accountability"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-05",
    "profile": "Public-sector operator",
    "persona": "Municipal service manager",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Test whether an AI service improves access while clarifying who is responsible when it fails.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "interaction_participants",
      "supervision_monitoring"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "regulatory_operational",
      "governance",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox links operational experimentation to a public authority that can interpret or oversee the relevant rules.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Public value",
      "Regulatory clarity"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-06",
    "profile": "Assurance specialist",
    "persona": "Independent model auditor",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Generate defensible evidence about performance, limitations and the effectiveness of safeguards.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "evidence_generation"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "innovation_stage",
      "governance",
      "other"
    ],
    "q3_other": "Risk and exposure level",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Regulatory learning and supervision add a decision context that ordinary assurance testing may not have.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Rights and safeguards"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-07",
    "profile": "Regulator",
    "persona": "Financial regulator supervisor",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Learn how a new service behaves under constraints while improving our supervisory approach.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "experimentation_testing",
      "supervision_monitoring"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "flexibility",
      "governance",
      "innovation_stage"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The authority must be part of the experiment rather than merely receiving a final report.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning",
      "Rights and safeguards"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-08",
    "profile": "AI developer",
    "persona": "Enterprise AI product lead",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Reduce uncertainty about permissible uses and build evidence for a credible deployment decision.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "evidence_generation",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "regulatory_operational",
      "innovation_stage"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "What matters is an agreed route from testing to a regulatory decision, even without exemptions.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory clarity",
      "Evidence generation"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-09",
    "profile": "Researcher",
    "persona": "Innovation studies scholar",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Understand whether experimentation helps institutions learn and enables responsible innovation.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "interaction_participants",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "governance",
      "participants"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Sandboxes are distinguishable by their institutional purpose, not necessarily by a unique set of testing activities.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning",
      "Innovation support"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-10",
    "profile": "Civil society",
    "persona": "Consumer organisation analyst",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Find and address harms before wider deployment, with understandable information for participants.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "defined_duration_scope",
      "supervision_monitoring"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "governance",
      "purpose",
      "participants"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox needs accountable public oversight; the label alone cannot substitute for safeguards.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Rights and safeguards",
      "Public accountability"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Rights and accountability"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-11",
    "profile": "Public-sector operator",
    "persona": "Hospital innovation lead",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Establish a safe clinical workflow and learn which evidence regulators need before scaling.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "technology_scope",
      "innovation_stage"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Clinical testing becomes sandbox activity when it is linked to a defined regulatory question and supervisory process.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Public value",
      "Evidence generation"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-12",
    "profile": "Assurance specialist",
    "persona": "Standards and certification expert",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Translate uncertain requirements into testable criteria that others can reuse.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "evidence_generation",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "regulatory_operational",
      "purpose",
      "flexibility"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox can clarify requirements during the test, whereas certification usually assesses against established criteria.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory clarity",
      "Evidence generation"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory dialogue"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-13",
    "profile": "Regulator",
    "persona": "Local regulatory policy adviser",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Coordinate fragmented oversight and learn where current rules create avoidable obstacles.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "interaction_participants",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "governance",
      "purpose",
      "participants"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Ongoing interaction with a competent authority is more important than automatic regulatory relief.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Coordination",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory dialogue"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-14",
    "profile": "AI developer",
    "persona": "Small business founder",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Enable a limited market trial when ordinary requirements make early evidence collection difficult.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "regulatory_flexibility",
      "defined_duration_scope"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "flexibility",
      "innovation_stage",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "strong",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox should offer a specific, authorised adjustment to normal conditions for a bounded trial.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Innovation support",
      "Regulatory clarity"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Authorised flexibility"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-15",
    "profile": "Researcher",
    "persona": "Legal researcher",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Clarify the limits of regulatory discretion and document what can be learned without changing the law.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "defined_duration_scope",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "flexibility",
      "governance",
      "regulatory_operational"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox operates through an explicit regulatory arrangement; exemptions are one possible feature, not a definition.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory clarity",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Authorised flexibility",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-16",
    "profile": "Civil society",
    "persona": "Disability inclusion advocate",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Ensure affected people shape what is tested and assess whether benefits are accessible in practice.",
    "q2": [
      "interaction_participants",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "other"
    ],
    "q2_other": "Public accountability",
    "q3": [
      "participants",
      "governance",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The key distinction should be enforceable responsibility for protecting participants during experimentation.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Rights and safeguards",
      "Public value"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Rights and accountability"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-17",
    "profile": "Public-sector operator",
    "persona": "Education agency programme lead",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Learn whether the proposed tool serves students and whether existing oversight is sufficient.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "experimentation_testing",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "participants",
      "technology_scope"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox adds an explicit regulatory learning and governance process to a service pilot.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Public value",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-18",
    "profile": "Assurance specialist",
    "persona": "Safety evaluation scientist",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Identify failure modes and develop evidence thresholds before testing in higher-exposure settings.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "defined_duration_scope",
      "evidence_generation"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "innovation_stage",
      "other",
      "governance"
    ],
    "q3_other": "Risk and exposure level",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The distinction is who can act on findings and alter the authorised testing conditions.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Rights and safeguards"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Authorised flexibility"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-19",
    "profile": "Regulator",
    "persona": "Cross-sector innovation office lead",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Support useful experimentation while learning which rules or guidance need revision.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "experimentation_testing",
      "interaction_participants"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "participants",
      "regulatory_operational"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "Innovation hubs",
    "q4_other_rating": "some",
    "q5": "A sandbox is a continuing relationship between a public authority and an experiment, not just a venue.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Innovation support",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-20",
    "profile": "AI developer",
    "persona": "Open-source AI maintainer",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Provide affordable access to expertise and transparent evidence expectations for smaller teams.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "interaction_participants",
      "evidence_generation"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "participants",
      "purpose",
      "technology_scope"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "strong",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox should offer regulatory dialogue that a stand-alone hackathon or testbed cannot provide.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Innovation support",
      "Evidence generation"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory dialogue"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-21",
    "profile": "Researcher",
    "persona": "Human-computer interaction researcher",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Learn how people encounter the technology and how that experience should inform oversight.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "interaction_participants",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "participants",
      "purpose",
      "regulatory_operational"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "strong",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Regulatory intent and accountability distinguish the sandbox even when its methods resemble a living lab.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Public value",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Rights and accountability",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-22",
    "profile": "Civil society",
    "persona": "Worker rights researcher",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Make the impacts on workers visible and create a credible basis to stop harmful uses.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "evidence_generation"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "governance",
      "participants",
      "other"
    ],
    "q3_other": "Risk and exposure level",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A regulatory sandbox must have a public decision process able to act on harms, not merely gather feedback.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Rights and safeguards",
      "Evidence generation"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Rights and accountability"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-23",
    "profile": "Public-sector operator",
    "persona": "Public procurement specialist",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Determine what evidence is sufficient for procurement and whether responsibilities can be sustained after the trial.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "defined_duration_scope",
      "evidence_generation"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "regulatory_operational",
      "governance",
      "innovation_stage"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The regulatory question and accountable authority distinguish it from an ordinary procurement pilot.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Public accountability"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-24",
    "profile": "Assurance specialist",
    "persona": "Responsible AI consultant",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Produce reusable evaluation methods while making their limitations clear to decision makers.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "evidence_generation",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "innovation_stage",
      "regulatory_operational"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Assurance can occur inside or outside a sandbox; the sandbox adds a supervised regulatory learning arrangement.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-25",
    "profile": "Regulator",
    "persona": "Sector licensing officer",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Test the effect of narrowly specified regulatory flexibility before considering permanent changes.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "regulatory_flexibility",
      "supervision_monitoring"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "flexibility",
      "governance",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "little",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The defining contribution is an authorised and monitored departure from standard conditions.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning",
      "Regulatory clarity"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Authorised flexibility"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-26",
    "profile": "AI developer",
    "persona": "Public-interest technology developer",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Improve the public usefulness of an application and obtain clear guidance without requiring a legal exemption.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "experimentation_testing",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "participants",
      "flexibility"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox creates structured regulatory dialogue around a test; flexibility may be unnecessary.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Public value",
      "Regulatory clarity"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory dialogue"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-27",
    "profile": "Researcher",
    "persona": "Comparative governance researcher",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Build evidence about how objectives and institutional arrangements change sandbox outcomes.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "purpose",
      "governance",
      "regulatory_operational"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "The boundary is contextual: similar activities can be sandbox components when organised around regulatory learning.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Regulatory learning",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-28",
    "profile": "Civil society",
    "persona": "Community participation organiser",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Give communities a meaningful say in whether and how experimentation affects them.",
    "q2": [
      "interaction_participants",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "other"
    ],
    "q2_other": "Public accountability",
    "q3": [
      "participants",
      "governance"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "strong",
      "hackathons": "some",
      "assurance": "some"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "Regulatory authority without meaningful participation is not enough to make the experiment legitimate.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Public accountability",
      "Rights and safeguards"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Rights and accountability"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-29",
    "profile": "Public-sector operator",
    "persona": "Government data steward",
    "modality": "Onsite",
    "q1": "Resolve data-use uncertainties and establish feasible oversight before starting a service trial.",
    "q2": [
      "regulatory_involvement",
      "supervision_monitoring"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "governance",
      "regulatory_operational",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "some",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A sandbox joins supervised testing to decisions about applicable obligations and responsibilities.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Coordination",
      "Regulatory clarity"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight"
    ]
  },
  {
    "id": "SIM-30",
    "profile": "Assurance specialist",
    "persona": "Evaluation laboratory director",
    "modality": "Online",
    "q1": "Establish reliable evidence and learn when technical tests are insufficient for a regulatory decision.",
    "q2": [
      "experimentation_testing",
      "supervision_monitoring",
      "regulatory_learning"
    ],
    "q2_other": "",
    "q3": [
      "regulatory_operational",
      "innovation_stage",
      "purpose"
    ],
    "q3_other": "",
    "q4": {
      "testbeds": "strong",
      "living_labs": "some",
      "hackathons": "little",
      "assurance": "strong"
    },
    "q4_other_name": "",
    "q4_other_rating": "",
    "q5": "A testbed may provide the infrastructure, but a sandbox adds regulatory purpose and continuing public supervision.",
    "q1_themes": [
      "Evidence generation",
      "Regulatory learning"
    ],
    "q5_themes": [
      "Public oversight",
      "Context and purpose"
    ]
  }
]