Incorporate submitted pilot review and adjudicate four score differences

Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a0cffe-206f-7323-89d3-b20ca4cf4bf9
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-09-26 21:06:38 +02:00
parent 629bc2e880
commit 21030784b1
13 changed files with 659 additions and 1 deletions

View file

@ -304,3 +304,23 @@ the frozen rubric. No human scores may be inferred or filled by a model. Shared
weaknesses concern policy-dependent retention, atomic supersession and backup/restore.
After human review, revise shared guidance if warranted and replicate on fresh
scenarios. These six briefs are consumed. T02/T03 remain progress; no M1 completion.
## User-submitted worksheet adjudicated — 2026-09-26
T03: imported worksheet-completed.md byte-for-byte under the pilot's
submitted-review-01 directory; verified all twelve answer texts and rubric rows.
The worksheet identifies GPT-5.6 Sol as reviewer, explicitly model review, with
aggregate-result exposure. Accepted as the user's submitted review without claiming
independent human validation or inventing external inference provenance.
Accepted all four binary-rating corrections under the frozen no-partial-credit
rubric: 44/48 ratings unchanged; updated totals 18/24 for both named and prose packs.
Original scores/summary remain immutable. Narrative unsafe-claim annotations are
retained with adjudication, not converted to an unsupported numeric count.
No presentation benefit demonstrated; equal counts do not establish equivalence.
User-review incorporation is complete. T03 remains progress: independent-human
validation is still unfulfilled under the frozen protocol, and later studies need
atomic criteria and fresh scenarios. Target shared guidance at policy-dependent
recovery, cancellation/reversal contracts, atomic supersession and backup/restore.
See research/evaluations/language-pilot-01/submitted-review-01/adjudication.md.