frontend-patterns/research/evaluations/language-pilot-01/human-review/README.md
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

30 lines
1.8 KiB
Markdown

# 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](review-bernd-worsch-2026-10-19.json) and
[disagreements with adjudication](disagreements-2026-10-19.json). 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](../protocol.md) and [the scenarios/rubric](../scenarios.json).
Each scenario has U and V responses in [masked](../masked/). These are the actual
model answers without condition metadata; no semantic redaction was applied.
Use the [combined worksheet](worksheet.md) for a readable form with all briefs and
answers, or copy [the empty scoring sheet](scores-template.json) 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.