Build a Delayed Fraud Outcome and Label-Maturity Ledger
Track when fraud outcomes become known and when they are sufficiently mature for analysis. Prevent recent unresolved transactions from being mislabeled as legitimate activity.
What you are building
The core problem, expected build, and operating context for this challenge.
A fraud analytics team preparing training and monitoring data.
Track when fraud outcomes become known and when they are sufficiently mature for analysis. Prevent recent unresolved transactions from being mislabeled as legitimate activity.
Key: transaction_id + label_version.
Fields: transaction_at, outcome_known_at, outcome, review_state, observation_cutoff, censoring_reason.
Label unknown, legitimate, and confirmed-synthetic-fraud separately. Preserve superseded labels.
Build a versioned outcome event ledger.
Apply an explicit fictional observation-window policy.
Produce as-of training snapshots and mature monitoring cohorts.
Export censoring summaries and label-revision histories.
An outcome timeline with maturity cohorts, unresolved records, and training-snapshot controls.
A point-in-time label store.
A data-quality report quantifying unknown and revised outcomes.
Runnable local application, setup commands, and a dependency lockfile.
Versioned input data, data dictionary, acquisition instructions, and rights notes.
Calculation traces, source references, assumption records, and exported review artifacts.
A deterministic baseline and tests for normal, incomplete, contradictory, and failure-recovery cases.
A recorded complete workflow with a reproducible manifest and explicit limitations.
Unknown outcomes never become negative labels by default.
A label arriving after the training cutoff is excluded.
A maturity rule alone does not establish that all fraud was observed.
Report monitoring results separately for mature and unresolved cohorts.
A known outcome and an unknown outcome with the same elapsed age have different training eligibility.
The attached starter files are prototype inputs. Expected starter answers are visible. They are not independent holdouts.
Full target: Use synthetic transaction, dispute, adjudication, and observation-window events. Public fraud datasets do not automatically supply real dispute timing or maturity guarantees.
Complete target contracts and expert review remain pending. Public observations are not historical release vintages.
DuckDB, PyArrow, pandas
Use an available model appropriate to the task. Record provider, model identifier, version or retrieval date, settings, cost, and latency. Use deterministic code for calculations. Models may extract, retrieve, or explain evidence. They must not invent missing records, override approval rules, or claim professional authority.
The maturity period is a fictional fixture policy, not a universal chargeback deadline.
No fabricated records, source citations, professional endorsements, or expert-adjudication claims.
No future-data leakage into dated decisions, model fitting, or historical valuation inputs.
No unauthorized payments, account restrictions, regulatory filings, or production changes.
No automated appraisal certification, tax-compliance determination, or unsupported fraud accusation.
No concealed uncertainty or silently invented inputs required for a numerical conclusion.
Correct domain calculations and justified methods with documented assumptions. Weight: 30.
Source lineage, temporal integrity, rights checks, and explicit synthetic-data labels. Weight: 25.
A working application with review, export, error handling, and reproducible state. Weight: 20.
Adversarial cases, uncertainty, missing-data behavior, and sensitivity analysis. Weight: 15.
Evidence-linked conclusions that distinguish facts, assumptions, and unresolved judgments. Weight: 10. Score each dimension from zero to two. Weighted score = sum(weight * score / 2). A failed safety gate blocks acceptance.
Participation guide
The maturity period is a fictional fixture policy, not a universal chargeback deadline. No fabricated records, source citations, professional endorsements, or expert-adjudication claims. No future-data leakage into dated decisions, model fitting, or historical valuation inputs. No unauthorized payments, account restrictions, regulatory filings, or production changes. No automated appraisal certification, tax-compliance determination, or unsupported fraud accusation. No concealed uncertainty or silently invented inputs required for a numerical conclusion.
How work is evaluated
100-point weighted review with safety gates. Visible starter cases do not establish full application correctness.
A point-in-time label store. A data-quality report quantifying unknown and revised outcomes. Runnable local application, setup commands, and a dependency lockfile. Versioned input data, data dictionary, acquisition instructions, and rights notes. Calculation traces, source references, assumption records, and exported review artifacts. A deterministic baseline and tests for normal, incomplete, contradictory, and failure-recovery cases. A recorded complete workflow with a reproducible manifest and explicit limitations.
Challenge datasets
Public datasets, plus the private datasets you have access to.
How submissions are scored
These dimensions define what the evaluator checks and which criteria separate a passable run from a strong one.
What you should walk away with
Build a versioned outcome event ledger.
Apply an explicit fictional observation-window policy.
Produce as-of training snapshots and mature monitoring cohorts.
Export censoring summaries and label-revision histories.
Reference links and supporting material
3 attached dataset file(s), including two visible synthetic starter cases. FRD-04 event-ledger prototype. Row patterns are deliberately artificial and unsuitable for model performance claims. FRD-04 delayed and unresolved outcomes. Keep this table separate from decision-time features. Complete target data remains pending.
Challenge setup
Configuration summary for this challenge.
Challenge input
Input details are not configured.
Agent execution
No agent tool is listed for this challenge.
Evaluated output
No output checks are configured.
- Rubric dimension 1
- Rubric dimension 2
- Rubric dimension 3
- 2 public reference cases
- No runtime settings are configured.
Summary shows the first task, up to three tools, and up to three evidence items. Open the technical recipe to view all configured items.
View technical recipe
Configured tools
No tool records are attached.
Evaluation contract
- Rubric dimension 1 · Weight 30
- Rubric dimension 2 · Weight 25
- Rubric dimension 3 · Weight 20
- Rubric dimension 4 · Weight 15
- Rubric dimension 5 · Weight 10
Reference cases
- 2 public reference cases
Workflow tasks
No workflow tasks are configured.
Recipe freeze marker
No recipe freeze time is recorded.