-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
[Spike] Establish a defensible synthetic-label and score-governance process #73
Copy link
Copy link
Open
Labels
GrantFox OSSIssue tracked in GrantFox OSSIssue tracked in GrantFox OSSMaybe RewardedIssue may be eligible for a GrantFox rewardIssue may be eligible for a GrantFox rewardThird CampaignCampaign: Third CampaignCampaign: Third Campaignarea: evaluationarea: fixturesDestination and transaction fixture coverageDestination and transaction fixture coveragearea: scoringScore stubs and tier modelingScore stubs and tier modelingenhancementNew feature or requestNew feature or requestspike
Description
Activity
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
GrantFox OSSIssue tracked in GrantFox OSSIssue tracked in GrantFox OSSMaybe RewardedIssue may be eligible for a GrantFox rewardIssue may be eligible for a GrantFox rewardThird CampaignCampaign: Third CampaignCampaign: Third Campaignarea: evaluationarea: fixturesDestination and transaction fixture coverageDestination and transaction fixture coveragearea: scoringScore stubs and tier modelingScore stubs and tier modelingenhancementNew feature or requestNew feature or requestspike
Category
Spike
Question
What evidence and review process should determine labels and static scores while preserving a deterministic synthetic dataset?
Context
Labels are synthetic and notes-based; scores are static, while research plans accuracy and false-positive measurements.
Why This Matters
Evaluation is only meaningful when labels and scores are explainable, repeatable, and protected from silent bias.
Areas to Investigate
Expert review, adversarial clean controls, score calibration, reviewer agreement, provenance, exceptions, and synthetic scenario generation.
Evaluation Criteria
Auditability, reproducibility, false-positive usefulness, reviewer effort, privacy, and dataset balance.
Expected Deliverables
Governance proposal, provenance design, review checklist, calibration method, and example reviewed change.
Acceptance Criteria
Follow-Up Opportunities
May lead to provenance fields and locked evaluation manifests.
Cross-Repository Impact
Testkit and research directly; adapter and extension consume the result.
Complexity
Spike
Impact
High — safeguards product measurements.
Suggested Labels
spike,area: scoring,area: fixtures,area: evaluation