Discussion about this post

User's avatar
AI in Investment by JD's avatar

Picking the right model is the smaller part of the problem on work nobody checks, the workflow is the key. A stronger model only lowers the error rate; it doesn't catch the errors that get through, and on unverifiable work those are exactly the ones that reach a client or a court.

The key is a review step, not a better model: an independent model checking the output against a long list of predefined criteria, plus (ideally) a list of deterministic tests it has to pass before anything is considered acceptable. That makes your "second read" doable quickly without reading the whole thing: the human approves from a short review note that summarises the key claims and a checklist scored against the criteria.

And where would you draw the line on what needs a full human read, no matter how good the review workflow gets?

No posts

Ready for more?