design-ai-benchmarking
FeaturedDesign and validity review for studies that benchmark one or more AI systems against a human-expert panel as the reference. Covers the evaluation question and arm definition, decoupled multi-dimensional rubrics with anchors, planted calibration probes, reviewer-panel construction, inter-rater reliability targets, LLM-as-judge versus human-as-judge adjudication, construct-independence guards, and a structured rating-export schema. Use before data collection on an AI-vs-expert evaluation.
Install
Quality Score: 96/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- Aperivue
- Repository
- Aperivue/medsci-skills
- Created
- 5 months ago
- Last Updated
- today
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
Bundled in these plugins
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
benchmark-curator
Design, curate, version, and quality-control benchmark or evaluation corpora for Agent Skills and quality workflows, including task taxonomies, discovery/forced/negative controls, adversarial and regression cases, difficulty strata, holdout isolation, provenance, duplication, contamination risk, coverage balance, and immutable benchmark hashes. Use when the user asks to build or maintain an eval dataset, golden set, benchmark suite, regression corpus, holdout, challenge set, or representative test cases. Do not use to execute the model experiment or claim lift (use skill-evaluator), to design the grading rubric (use rubric-designer), to edit the candidate skill (use skill-creator), or to treat leaked/known cases as a clean holdout.
ai-eval-review
Audit the evaluation layer of an AI product against design-completeness questions: offline criteria, ground-truth quality, online signal, cohort/disparate-impact, adversarial + robustness coverage, and drift detection. Eval-side companion to `ai-ux-review`. Produces an editable Markdown artifact plus a self-contained HTML report under `docs/ai-ux/`. Use when the user asks to "review my AI eval setup", "audit my eval design", "is my AI eval rigorous enough", "responsible-AI eval review", "fairness eval check", or "drift detection design", or ships an LLM/ML feature and wants an eval-rigor check. Invoke even if only one block is named — the others stress-test it. Does NOT trigger for: human-AI UX review (`ai-ux-review`); lean-canvas work (`validation-canvas`); adversarial pre-mortem with a verdict (`startup-grill`); SKILL.md audits (`skill-evaluator`); implementing eval pipelines, writing eval code, or labeling datasets (this skill names gaps, it does not build them).
advanced-evaluation
Design and operate LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation systems using direct scoring, pairwise comparison, rubric calibration, evaluator bias mitigation, confidence scoring, and automated quality assessment. Use when building LLM-as-judge systems, comparing model responses, calibrating rubrics, debugging inconsistent evaluations, or designing A/B tests for prompt or model changes.