Changes for page Workflows
Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/24 20:34
From version 5.1
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2025/12/12 21:50
on 2025/12/12 21:50
Change comment:
Rollback to version 3.1
Summary
-
Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Page properties
-
- Content
-
... ... @@ -1,127 +1,410 @@ 1 1 = Workflows = 2 2 3 -This chapterdefines the core workflowsusedacrossthe FactHarborsystem.3 +This page describes the core workflows for content creation, review, and publication in FactHarbor. 4 4 5 -Each workflow describes: 6 -* Purpose 7 -* Participants 8 -* Steps 9 -* Automation vs. manual work 5 +== Overview == 10 10 11 - == 1. ClaimWorkflow==7 +FactHarbor workflows support three publication modes with risk-based review: 12 12 13 -**Purpose:** Transform raw text or input material into a normalized, classified, deduplicated, and versioned claim. 9 +* **Mode 1 (Draft)**: Internal only, failed quality gates or pending review 10 +* **Mode 2 (AI-Generated)**: Public with AI-generated label, passed quality gates 11 +* **Mode 3 (Human-Reviewed)**: Public with human-reviewed status, highest trust 14 14 15 -**Participants:** 16 -* Contributor 17 -* AKEL 18 -* Reviewer 13 +Workflows vary by **Risk Tier** (A/B/C) and **Content Type** (Claim, Scenario, Evidence, Verdict). 19 19 20 -**Steps:** 21 -1. **Ingestion**: User submits text/URL; AKEL extracts claims. 22 -1. **Normalization**: Standardize wording, reduce ambiguity. 23 -1. **Classification**: Domain, Evaluability, Safety (AKEL draft → Human confirm). 24 -1. **Duplicate Detection**: Check embeddings for existing claims. 25 -1. **Version Creation**: Store new ClaimVersion. 26 -1. **Cluster Assignment**: Assign to Claim Cluster. 27 -1. **Scenario Linking**: Connect to existing or draft new scenarios. 28 -1. **Publication**: Make visible. 15 +---- 29 29 30 - **Flow:**Ingest → Normalize →Classify→ Deduplicate → Cluster → Version→Publish17 +== Claim Submission & Publication Workflow == 31 31 32 -== 2.ScenarioWorkflow==19 +=== Step 1: Claim Submission === 33 33 34 -** Purpose:**Definethe specific analytic contextsneeded toevaluate each claim.21 +**Actor**: Contributor or AKEL 35 35 36 -**Steps:** 37 -1. **Scenario Proposal**: Drafted by contributor or AKEL. 38 -1. **Required Fields**: Definitions, Assumptions, ContextBoundary, EvaluationMethod, SafetyClass. 39 -1. **Safety Interception**: AKEL flags non-falsifiable or unsafe content. 40 -1. **Conflict Check**: Merge similar scenarios, flag contradictions. 41 -1. **Reviewer Validation**: Ensure clarity and validity. 42 -1. **Expert Approval**: Mandatory for high-risk domains. 43 -1. **Version Storage**: Save ScenarioVersion. 23 +**Actions**: 44 44 45 -**Flow:** Draft → Validate → Safety Check → Review → Expert → Version → Activate 25 +* Submit claim text 26 +* Provide initial sources (optional for human contributors, mandatory for AKEL) 27 +* System assigns initial AuthorType (Human or AI) 46 46 47 - ==3. EvidenceWorkflow==29 +**Output**: Claim draft created 48 48 49 - **Purpose:**Structure,classify,validate,version, and link evidencetoscenarios.31 +=== Step 2: AKEL Processing === 50 50 51 -**Steps:** 52 -1. **Submission**: File, URL, or text. 53 -1. **Metadata Extraction**: Type, Category, Provenance, ReliabilityHints. 54 -1. **Relevance Check**: Verify applicability to scenario. 55 -1. **Reliability Assessment**: Score reliability (Reviewer + Expert). 56 -1. **Link Creation**: Create ScenarioEvidenceLink with relevance score. 57 -1. **Versioning**: Update EvidenceVersion. 33 +**Automated Steps**: 58 58 59 -**Flow:** Submit → Extract → Relevance → Reliability → Link → Version 35 +1. Claim extraction and normalization 36 +2. Classification (domain, type, evaluability) 37 +3. Risk tier assignment (A/B/C suggested) 38 +4. Initial scenario generation 39 +5. Evidence search 40 +6. **Contradiction search** (mandatory) 41 +7. Quality gate validation 60 60 61 - ==4. VerdictWorkflow==43 +**Output**: Processed claim with risk tier and quality gate results 62 62 63 - **Purpose:**Generate likelihood estimates**per scenario** based on evidence.45 +=== Step 3: Quality Gate Checkpoint === 64 64 65 -**Steps:** 66 -1. **Aggregation**: Collect linked evidence for a specific scenario. 67 -1. **Draft Verdict**: AKEL proposes likelihood and uncertainty for that scenario. 68 -1. **Reasoning**: AKEL drafts explanation chain. 69 -1. **Validation**: Reviewer checks logic and hallucinations. 70 -1. **Expert Review**: Required for sensitive topics. 71 -1. **Storage**: Save VerdictVersion. 47 +**Gates Evaluated**: 72 72 73 -**Flow:** Aggregate → Draft → Reasoning → Review → Expert → Version 49 +* Source quality 50 +* Contradiction search completion 51 +* Uncertainty quantification 52 +* Structural integrity 74 74 75 - == 5. Re-evaluation Workflow ==54 +**Outcomes**: 76 76 77 -**Purpose:** Keep verdicts current when inputs change. 56 +* **All gates pass** → Proceed to Mode 2 publication (if Tier B or C) 57 +* **Any gate fails** → Mode 1 (Draft), flag for human review 58 +* **Tier A** → Mode 2 with warnings + auto-escalate to expert queue 78 78 79 -**Steps:** 80 -1. **Trigger**: Evidence update, Scenario change, or Contradiction. 81 -1. **Impact Analysis**: Identify affected nodes. 82 -1. **Re-calculation**: AKEL proposes new likelihoods. 83 -1. **Validation**: Human review. 84 -1. **Storage**: New version. 60 +=== Step 4: Publication (Risk-Tier Dependent) === 85 85 86 -** Flow:**Trigger→Analyze → Recompute→Review → Version62 +**Tier C (Low Risk)**: 87 87 88 -== 6. Federation Synchronization Workflow == 64 +* **Direct to Mode 2**: AI-generated, public, clearly labeled 65 +* User can request human review 66 +* Sampling audit applies 89 89 90 -** Purpose:** Exchange structureddatabetween nodes.68 +**Tier B (Medium Risk)**: 91 91 92 -**Steps:** 93 -1. Detect Version Changes. 94 -1. Build Signed Bundle (Merkle tree). 95 -1. Push/Pull to Peers. 96 -1. Validate Signatures & Lineage. 97 -1. Resolve Conflicts (Merge/Fork). 98 -1. Trigger Re-evaluation. 70 +* **Direct to Mode 2**: AI-generated, public, clearly labeled 71 +* Higher audit sampling rate 72 +* High-engagement content may auto-escalate 99 99 100 - == 7. UserRole&Review Workflow ==74 +**Tier A (High Risk)**: 101 101 102 -**Purpose:** Ensure correctness and safety. 76 +* **Mode 2 with warnings**: AI-generated, public, prominent disclaimers 77 +* **Auto-escalated** to expert review queue 78 +* User warnings displayed 79 +* Highest audit sampling rate 103 103 104 -**Steps:** 105 -1. Submission. 106 -1. Auto-check (AKEL). 107 -1. Reviewer Validation. 108 -1. Expert Validation (if needed). 109 -1. Moderator Oversight (if flagged). 81 +=== Step 5: Human Review (Optional for B/C, Escalated for A) === 110 110 111 - == 8. AKEL Workflow ==83 +**Triggers**: 112 112 113 -**Stages:** 114 -* Input Understanding 115 -* Scenario Drafting 116 -* Evidence Processing 117 -* Verdict Drafting 118 -* Safety & Integrity 119 -* Human Approval 85 +* User requests review 86 +* Audit flags issues 87 +* High engagement (Tier B) 88 +* Automatic (Tier A) 120 120 121 - == 9. Global Trigger Flow (Cascade) ==90 +**Process**: 122 122 123 -**Sources:** Claim/Scenario/Evidence change, Verdict contradiction, Federation update. 92 +1. Reviewer/Expert examines claim 93 +2. Validates quality gates 94 +3. Checks contradiction search results 95 +4. Assesses risk tier appropriateness 96 +5. Decision: Approve, Request Changes, or Reject 124 124 125 -** Flow:** Trigger → Dependency Graph → Re-evaluation → Updated Verdicts98 +**Outcomes**: 126 126 127 -{{include reference="FactHarbor.Specification.Diagrams.Global Trigger Cascade.WebHome"/}} 100 +* **Approved** → Mode 3 (Human-Reviewed) 101 +* **Changes Requested** → Back to contributor or AKEL for revision 102 +* **Rejected** → Rejected status with reasoning 103 + 104 +---- 105 + 106 +== Scenario Creation Workflow == 107 + 108 +=== Step 1: Scenario Generation === 109 + 110 +**Automated (AKEL)**: 111 + 112 +* Generate scenarios for claim 113 +* Define boundaries, assumptions, context 114 +* Identify evaluation methods 115 + 116 +**Manual (Expert/Reviewer)**: 117 + 118 +* Create custom scenarios 119 +* Refine AKEL-generated scenarios 120 +* Add domain-specific nuances 121 + 122 +=== Step 2: Scenario Validation === 123 + 124 +**Quality Checks**: 125 + 126 +* Completeness (definitions, boundaries, assumptions clear) 127 +* Relevance to claim 128 +* Evaluability 129 +* No circular logic 130 + 131 +**Risk Tier Assignment**: 132 + 133 +* Inherits from parent claim 134 +* Can be overridden by expert if scenario increases/decreases risk 135 + 136 +=== Step 3: Scenario Publication === 137 + 138 +**Mode 2 (AI-Generated)**: 139 + 140 +* Tier B/C scenarios can publish immediately 141 +* Subject to sampling audits 142 + 143 +**Mode 1 (Draft)**: 144 + 145 +* Tier A scenarios default to draft 146 +* Require expert validation for Mode 2 or Mode 3 147 + 148 +---- 149 + 150 +== Evidence Evaluation Workflow == 151 + 152 +=== Step 1: Evidence Search & Retrieval === 153 + 154 +**AKEL Actions**: 155 + 156 +* Search academic databases, reputable media 157 +* **Mandatory contradiction search** (counter-evidence, reservations) 158 +* Extract metadata (author, date, publication, methodology) 159 +* Assess source reliability 160 + 161 +**Quality Requirements**: 162 + 163 +* Primary sources preferred 164 +* Diverse perspectives included 165 +* Echo chambers flagged 166 +* Conflicting evidence acknowledged 167 + 168 +=== Step 2: Evidence Summarization === 169 + 170 +**AKEL Generates**: 171 + 172 +* Summary of evidence 173 +* Relevance assessment 174 +* Reliability score 175 +* Limitations and caveats 176 +* Conflicting evidence summary 177 + 178 +**Quality Gate**: Structural integrity, source quality 179 + 180 +=== Step 3: Evidence Review === 181 + 182 +**Reviewer/Expert Validates**: 183 + 184 +* Accuracy of summaries 185 +* Appropriateness of sources 186 +* Completeness of contradiction search 187 +* Reliability assessments 188 + 189 +**Outcomes**: 190 + 191 +* **Mode 2**: Evidence summaries published as AI-generated 192 +* **Mode 3**: After human validation 193 +* **Mode 1**: Failed quality checks or pending expert review 194 + 195 +---- 196 + 197 +== Verdict Generation Workflow == 198 + 199 +=== Step 1: Verdict Computation === 200 + 201 +**AKEL Computes**: 202 + 203 +* Verdict across scenarios 204 +* Confidence scores 205 +* Uncertainty quantification 206 +* Key assumptions 207 +* Limitations 208 + 209 +**Inputs**: 210 + 211 +* Claim text 212 +* Scenario definitions 213 +* Evidence assessments 214 +* Contradiction search results 215 + 216 +=== Step 2: Verdict Validation === 217 + 218 +**Quality Gates**: 219 + 220 +* All four gates apply (source, contradiction, uncertainty, structure) 221 +* Reasoning chain must be traceable 222 +* Assumptions must be explicit 223 + 224 +**Risk Tier Check**: 225 + 226 +* Tier A: Always requires expert validation for Mode 3 227 +* Tier B: Mode 2 allowed, audit sampling 228 +* Tier C: Mode 2 default 229 + 230 +=== Step 3: Verdict Publication === 231 + 232 +**Mode 2 (AI-Generated Verdict)**: 233 + 234 +* Clear labeling with confidence scores 235 +* Uncertainty disclosure 236 +* Links to reasoning trail 237 +* User can request expert review 238 + 239 +**Mode 3 (Expert-Validated Verdict)**: 240 + 241 +* Human reviewer/expert stamp 242 +* Additional commentary (optional) 243 +* Highest trust level 244 + 245 +---- 246 + 247 +== Audit Workflow == 248 + 249 +=== Step 1: Audit Sampling Selection === 250 + 251 +**Stratified Sampling**: 252 + 253 +* Risk tier priority (A > B > C) 254 +* Low confidence scores 255 +* High traffic content 256 +* Novel topics 257 +* User flags 258 + 259 +**Sampling Rates** (Recommendations): 260 + 261 +* Tier A: 30-50% 262 +* Tier B: 10-20% 263 +* Tier C: 5-10% 264 + 265 +=== Step 2: Audit Execution === 266 + 267 +**Auditor Actions**: 268 + 269 +1. Review sampled AI-generated content 270 +2. Validate quality gates were properly applied 271 +3. Check contradiction search completeness 272 +4. Assess reasoning quality 273 +5. Identify errors or hallucinations 274 + 275 +**Audit Outcome**: 276 + 277 +* **Pass**: Content remains in Mode 2, logged as validated 278 +* **Fail**: Content flagged for review, system improvement triggered 279 + 280 +=== Step 3: Feedback Loop === 281 + 282 +**System Improvements**: 283 + 284 +* Failed audits analyzed for patterns 285 +* AKEL parameters adjusted 286 +* Quality gates refined 287 +* Risk tier assignments recalibrated 288 + 289 +**Transparency**: 290 + 291 +* Audit statistics published periodically 292 +* Patterns shared with community 293 +* System improvements documented 294 + 295 +---- 296 + 297 +== Mode Transition Workflow == 298 + 299 +=== Mode 1 → Mode 2 === 300 + 301 +**Requirements**: 302 + 303 +* All quality gates pass 304 +* Risk tier B or C (or A with warnings) 305 +* Contradiction search completed 306 + 307 +**Trigger**: Automatic upon quality gate validation 308 + 309 +=== Mode 2 → Mode 3 === 310 + 311 +**Requirements**: 312 + 313 +* Human reviewer/expert validation 314 +* Quality standards confirmed 315 +* For Tier A: Expert approval required 316 +* For Tier B/C: Reviewer approval sufficient 317 + 318 +**Trigger**: Human review completion 319 + 320 +=== Mode 3 → Mode 1 (Demotion) === 321 + 322 +**Rare - Only if**: 323 + 324 +* New evidence contradicts verdict 325 +* Error discovered in reasoning 326 +* Source retraction 327 + 328 +**Process**: 329 + 330 +1. Content flagged for re-evaluation 331 +2. Moved to draft (Mode 1) 332 +3. Re-processed through workflow 333 +4. Reason for demotion documented 334 + 335 +---- 336 + 337 +== User Actions Across Modes == 338 + 339 +=== On Mode 1 (Draft) Content === 340 + 341 +**Contributors**: 342 + 343 +* Edit their own drafts 344 +* Submit for review 345 + 346 +**Reviewers/Experts**: 347 + 348 +* View and comment 349 +* Request changes 350 +* Approve for Mode 2 or Mode 3 351 + 352 +=== On Mode 2 (AI-Generated) Content === 353 + 354 +**All Users**: 355 + 356 +* Read and use content 357 +* Request human review 358 +* Flag for expert attention 359 +* Provide feedback 360 + 361 +**Reviewers/Experts**: 362 + 363 +* Validate for Mode 3 transition 364 +* Edit and refine 365 +* Adjust risk tier if needed 366 + 367 +=== On Mode 3 (Human-Reviewed) Content === 368 + 369 +**All Users**: 370 + 371 +* Read with highest confidence 372 +* Still can flag if new evidence emerges 373 + 374 +**Reviewers/Experts**: 375 + 376 +* Update if needed 377 +* Trigger re-evaluation if new evidence 378 + 379 +---- 380 + 381 +== Diagram References == 382 + 383 +=== Claim and Scenario Lifecycle (Overview) === 384 + 385 +{{include reference="FactHarbor.Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.23 Lost Data.Organisation.Diagrams.Claim and Scenario Lifecycle (Overview).WebHome"/}} 386 + 387 +=== Claim and Scenario Workflow === 388 + 389 +{{include reference="Test.FactHarborV09.Specification.Diagrams.Claim and Scenario Workflow.WebHome"/}} 390 + 391 +=== Evidence and Verdict Workflow === 392 + 393 +{{include reference="Test.FactHarborV09.Specification.Diagrams.Evidence and Verdict Workflow.WebHome"/}} 394 + 395 +=== Quality and Audit Workflow === 396 + 397 +{{include reference="Test.FactHarborV09.Specification.Diagrams.Quality and Audit Workflow.WebHome"/}} 398 + 399 + 400 + 401 +{{include reference="Test.FactHarborV09.Specification.Diagrams.Manual vs Automated matrix.WebHome"/}} 402 + 403 +---- 404 + 405 +== Related Pages == 406 + 407 +* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]] 408 +* [[Automation>>FactHarbor.Specification.Automation.WebHome]] 409 +* [[Requirements (Roles)>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]] 410 +* [[Governance>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Governance]]