frontend-patterns/research/evaluations/language-pilot-01/human-review
tegwick 6f34fd6fed Complete human pilot-01 review and adjudication (FEP-WP-0009-T01)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 182330@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 242866cf-789d-4e24-ac5e-0a1d7b47a701
2026-10-19 23:57:05 +02:00
..
disagreements-2026-10-19.json Complete human pilot-01 review and adjudication (FEP-WP-0009-T01) 2026-10-19 23:57:05 +02:00
README.md Complete human pilot-01 review and adjudication (FEP-WP-0009-T01) 2026-10-19 23:57:05 +02:00
review-bernd-worsch-2026-10-19.json Submit complete human pilot-01 review (S01-S06) 2026-10-19 23:33:23 +02:00
scores-template.json Record twelve pilot sessions and masked editorial judgments 2026-09-26 20:04:29 +02:00
worksheet.md Report inconclusive presentation pilot and prepare human adjudication 2026-09-26 20:07:55 +02:00

Human review handoff

Status: a human review was completed on 2026-10-19 by the repository owner, who declared no prior exposure to scores or the assignment key: review sheet and disagreements with adjudication. The earlier model-assisted worksheet still does not count. The blank materials remain available for further reviewers.

Start here without opening assignment.json, raw/, results or editorial scores. Read the scoring rules and the scenarios/rubric. Each scenario has U and V responses in masked. These are the actual model answers without condition metadata; no semantic redaction was applied.

Use the combined worksheet for a readable form with all briefs and answers, or copy the empty scoring sheet to a new file. Enter your name, date and whether you saw the assignment or prior scores. For each answer, score C1, C2, R and Q as 1 or 0 using the frozen rubric, with quotations or locators. List unsupported guarantees separately (use [] only after checking). No credit for pattern vocabulary. Flag ambiguity and suspected condition clues. Return your sheet before inspecting the assignment key. No result is implied by this template.

This is 12 short answers across six pairs. Reviewing all is preferred; if reviewing a subset, record which were chosen before reading them. A partial review remains partial. The repository owner prepared the materials and editorial scores; a human reviewer provides the independent assessment still missing from this pilot.

After submission, compare disagreements against the same rubric and retain both original judgments and any adjudication. Do not replace disagreement with an average or silently overwrite the original sheet. Work owner: FEP-WP-0002 T03.