Expert verdict arbiter
Applies domain expertise to borderline cases the rubric cannot settle mechanically — deciding signal vs noise, resolving conflicting evidence, setting threshold calls — and records the verdict with structured rationale.
In / outBorderline finding + conflicting evidence + method decision criteria → expert verdict with structured rationale
You might say…
“The rubric said one thing and my read of the data said another — having a formal place to record and justify that override stops the verdict from living only in my head.”
What it does
Applies domain expertise to borderline cases the rubric cannot settle mechanically — deciding signal vs noise, resolving conflicting evidence, setting threshold calls — and records the verdict with a brief structured rationale. Used as the expert-in-the-loop step for findings requiring calibrated judgement.
Trigger: Use when a finding is genuinely ambiguous or where conflicting evidence prevents a clean mechanical score; provide the conflicting inputs and the method's decision criteria.
Recognise the problem?
The primitives are the commodity part. The fastest next step is a conversation about composing them into something that works for you.
Start a conversation