Skip to main content
Challenge

Build a Public Project Cost-Benefit and Timing Review Workbench

Compare fictional public projects using transparent timing, cost, and benefit assumptions. Keep distributional effects and unpriced impacts visible beside the present-value calculation.

policy-analysisHosted by Vera
Challenge brief

What you are building

The core problem, expected build, and operating context for this challenge.

A public-sector analyst comparing infrastructure proposals.

Compare fictional public projects using transparent timing, cost, and benefit assumptions. Keep distributional effects and unpriced impacts visible beside the present-value calculation.

Key: project_id + scenario_id + year + flow_type.

Fields: amount, real_or_nominal, price_year, beneficiary_group, discount_rate, evidence_quality.

Do not discount nominal flows using an unexplained real rate. Separate transfers from resource costs.

Reconcile flows and economic accounting boundaries.

Calculate present values under stated timing and rate assumptions.

Compare distributional and unpriced effects separately.

Export a ranked scenario report with switching-value sensitivities.

A project comparison table with cash-flow timelines, distribution panels, and assumption sensitivity controls.

A transparent project appraisal workbook.

A decision memo with unpriced impacts and uncertainty rather than one unsupported ranking.

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.

Discounting follows the stated time-zero convention.

Price basis and discount basis are compatible.

Transfers are not counted as both a benefit and a net resource gain without justification.

A positive present value is not labeled automatic policy approval.

Identical future benefits can reverse a project ranking when timing differs. The fixture isolates the stated discount convention.

The attached starter files are prototype inputs. Expected starter answers are visible. They are not independent holdouts.

Full target: Author three fictional projects with annual costs, benefits, maintenance, uncertainty scenarios, and beneficiary groups. Supply discount assumptions instead of claiming a mandated rate.

Complete target contracts and expert review remain pending. Public observations are not historical release vintages.

NumPy, pandas, openpyxl

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.

No discount rate in the fixtures is a current government requirement.

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.

Rules

Participation guide

No discount rate in the fixtures is a current government requirement. 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.

Delivery guide

How work is evaluated

Evaluation

100-point weighted review with safety gates. Visible starter cases do not establish full application correctness.

Submission format

A transparent project appraisal workbook. A decision memo with unpriced impacts and uncertainty rather than one unsupported ranking. 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.

Datasets

Challenge datasets

Public datasets, plus the private datasets you have access to.

Evaluation rubric

How submissions are scored

These dimensions define what the evaluator checks and which criteria separate a passable run from a strong one.

Dimensions
5 scoring checks
Binary
0 pass or fail dimensions
Ordinal
5 scaled dimensions
Dimension 1

Score scale
012
Dimension 2

Score scale
012
Dimension 3

Score scale
012
Dimension 4

Score scale
012
Dimension 5

Score scale
012
Learning goals

What you should walk away with

  • Reconcile flows and economic accounting boundaries.

  • Calculate present values under stated timing and rate assumptions.

  • Compare distributional and unpriced effects separately.

  • Export a ranked scenario report with switching-value sensitivities.

Resources and assets

Reference links and supporting material

Dataset notes

1 attached dataset file(s), including two visible synthetic starter cases. 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.

Evaluation checks
  • Rubric dimension 1
  • Rubric dimension 2
  • Rubric dimension 3
Configured evaluation evidence
  • 2 public reference cases
Configured runtime
  • 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.

Frequently Asked Questions about Build a Public Project Cost-Benefit and Timing Review Workbench