Build an Investigator Disagreement and Case Adjudication Portal
Collect independent investigator judgments, preserve disagreement, and manage adjudication evidence. Publish label provenance instead of pretending that ambiguous fraud cases have obvious ground truth.
What you are building
Two investigators independently mark a case for review. Their agreement is not ground truth. Build an adjudication queue that preserves both judgments, their evidence, and later revisions. When new evidence changes a judgment, reopen the disagreement and export its history. Do not label synthetic examples as expert-adjudicated cases.
Rules
No claims of bank endorsement, professional authorship, or expert-adjudicated labels without documented participation. 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 role-separated label review application. A data card reporting reviewer participation, disagreements, and unresolved labels. 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
Public datasets, plus the private datasets you have access to.
How submissions are scored
Learning goals
Assign blinded independent case reviews.
Record labels, evidence, confidence, and abstentions.
Route disagreements to a documented adjudication workflow.
Export versioned labels with provenance and unresolved cases.
Resources
2 attached datasets, including two visible synthetic starter cases. The fixture ZIP supplies synthetic exercise inputs. It does not supply independently verified real-world records.
Challenge setup
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.
Shows the first task, up to three tools, and up to three evidence 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.