Write the problem hypothesis
For [owner], the agent takes or proposes [action] without enough [visibility, approval or control], creating [risk].
You can name one user, one situation and one measurable consequence without proposing a feature.Public model-drift leaderboard (hallucination over deep multi-agent chains) — preregistered
Evidence observed in alizahidraja/isnad, a Research project.
2 comments0 positive reactions16 days openProject Radar 79
enhancementhelp wantedarea/benchmark
Start free validation sprint4 guided steps · private notes · cloud sync
SOURCE EVIDENCE
Read original GitHub Issue ↗Start with what users actually said
Reporter context: Context (verified against repo) Two related-but-distinct artifacts already exist: ISNAD-Bench (#58, shipped in 2.6.0) — validates grading against classical hadith ground truth (κ = 0.87). (#50) — measures ISNAD's own corruption-detection. Neither is a model leaderboard. Proposal An open, independent leaderboard (e.g.…Excerpted from the public Issue. Read the complete thread before interpreting it.
Interview five affected users
- Which action needs oversight?
- When should a human intervene?
- What evidence is needed to approve it?
- How is an action reversed?
- Who is accountable when it fails?
Run the smallest experiment
Insert one approval, audit or pause point into a live workflow and measure delay versus prevented risk.
Owners can explain, approve and reverse the action without blocking low-risk work.Make a build decision
- Build: repeated pain and active commitment
- Narrow: pain is real but the audience or job differs
- Stop: weak frequency or no behavioral proof
Why this brief exists
Information has value only when it changes action. This page turns one public signal into a bounded validation exercise. It is a research aid, not proof of demand, investment advice or a product recommendation.