Changes for page Workflows
Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/24 20:34
Summary
-
Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Page properties
-
- Content
-
... ... @@ -1,410 +1,127 @@ 1 1 = Workflows = 2 2 3 -This page describes the core workflowsfor contentcreation,review,and publication inFactHarbor.3 +This chapter defines the core workflows used across the FactHarbor system. 4 4 5 -== Overview == 5 +Each workflow describes: 6 +* Purpose 7 +* Participants 8 +* Steps 9 +* Automation vs. manual work 6 6 7 - FactHarborworkflowssupport three publicationmodeswithrisk-based review:11 +== 1. Claim Workflow == 8 8 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 13 +**Purpose:** Transform raw text or input material into a normalized, classified, deduplicated, and versioned claim. 12 12 13 -Workflows vary by **Risk Tier** (A/B/C) and **Content Type** (Claim, Scenario, Evidence, Verdict). 15 +**Participants:** 16 +* Contributor 17 +* AKEL 18 +* Reviewer 14 14 15 ----- 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. 16 16 17 - == ClaimSubmission&PublicationWorkflow==30 +**Flow:** Ingest → Normalize → Classify → Deduplicate → Cluster → Version → Publish 18 18 19 -== =Step 1: ClaimSubmission===32 +== 2. Scenario Workflow == 20 20 21 -** Actor**:ContributororAKEL34 +**Purpose:** Define the specific analytic contexts needed to evaluate each claim. 22 22 23 -**Actions**: 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. 24 24 25 -* Submit claim text 26 -* Provide initial sources (optional for human contributors, mandatory for AKEL) 27 -* System assigns initial AuthorType (Human or AI) 45 +**Flow:** Draft → Validate → Safety Check → Review → Expert → Version → Activate 28 28 29 - **Output**:Claimdraftcreated47 +== 3. Evidence Workflow == 30 30 31 - ===Step2:AKELProcessing===49 +**Purpose:** Structure, classify, validate, version, and link evidence to scenarios. 32 32 33 -**Automated Steps**: 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. 34 34 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 59 +**Flow:** Submit → Extract → Relevance → Reliability → Link → Version 42 42 43 - **Output**:Processedclaim with risk tierandqualitygateresults61 +== 4. Verdict Workflow == 44 44 45 - === Step3:QualityGateCheckpoint===63 +**Purpose:** Generate likelihood estimates **per scenario** based on evidence. 46 46 47 -**Gates Evaluated**: 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. 48 48 49 -* Source quality 50 -* Contradiction search completion 51 -* Uncertainty quantification 52 -* Structural integrity 73 +**Flow:** Aggregate → Draft → Reasoning → Review → Expert → Version 53 53 54 - **Outcomes**:75 +== 5. Re-evaluation Workflow == 55 55 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 77 +**Purpose:** Keep verdicts current when inputs change. 59 59 60 -=== Step 4: Publication (Risk-Tier Dependent) === 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. 61 61 62 -**Tier C(LowRisk)**:86 +**Flow:** Trigger → Analyze → Recompute → Review → Version 63 63 64 -* **Direct to Mode 2**: AI-generated, public, clearly labeled 65 -* User can request human review 66 -* Sampling audit applies 88 +== 6. Federation Synchronization Workflow == 67 67 68 -** TierB(MediumRisk)**:90 +**Purpose:** Exchange structured data between nodes. 69 69 70 -* **Direct to Mode 2**: AI-generated, public, clearly labeled 71 -* Higher audit sampling rate 72 -* High-engagement content may auto-escalate 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. 73 73 74 - **TierA(HighRisk)**:100 +== 7. User Role & Review Workflow == 75 75 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 102 +**Purpose:** Ensure correctness and safety. 80 80 81 -=== Step 5: Human Review (Optional for B/C, Escalated for A) === 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). 82 82 83 - **Triggers**:111 +== 8. AKEL Workflow == 84 84 85 -* User requests review 86 -* Audit flags issues 87 -* High engagement (Tier B) 88 -* Automatic (Tier A) 113 +**Stages:** 114 +* Input Understanding 115 +* Scenario Drafting 116 +* Evidence Processing 117 +* Verdict Drafting 118 +* Safety & Integrity 119 +* Human Approval 89 89 90 - **Process**:121 +== 9. Global Trigger Flow (Cascade) == 91 91 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 123 +**Sources:** Claim/Scenario/Evidence change, Verdict contradiction, Federation update. 97 97 98 -** Outcomes**:125 +**Flow:** Trigger → Dependency Graph → Re-evaluation → Updated Verdicts 99 99 100 -* **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]] 127 +{{include reference="FactHarbor.Specification.Diagrams.Global Trigger Cascade.WebHome"/}}