design-ai-benchmarking

Featured

Design 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.

AI & Automation 292 stars 71 forks Updated 4 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 95/100

Stars 20%
82
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Design-AI-Benchmarking Skill ## Purpose This skill pressure-tests an AI-vs-human-expert benchmark **before any ratings are collected**, so that the comparison is fair, the rubric measures distinct constructs, the scale is calibrated, and the reported reliability is interpretable. It is the AI-evaluation specialization of `/design-study`: where `/design-study` reviews a study in general, this skill owns the specific machinery of comparing AI system(s) to a panel of human experts (or to each other) on rated outputs. Use it when: - one or more AI systems will be scored against a human-expert reference (reader study, annotation panel, AI-output evaluation, model-vs-model bench) - a rubric and rating protocol must be locked before reviewers begin - a benchmark feels vulnerable to "the highest score is just the most tautological item" or "low agreement, but we cannot tell why" criticism - a reviewer or editor asks how the evaluation controlled for rater drift, leakage, or judge bias Do **not** use it for: general study/validity review (use `/design-study`); statistical execution such as ICC or DeLong (use `/analyze-stats`); reporting-guideline item audits (use `/check-reporting`); or reviewing an already-written manuscript (use `/peer-review` or `/self-review`). --- ## Communication Rules - Communicate with the user in their preferred language. - Use English for statistical, machine-learning, and reporting-guideline terminology. - Be direct about evaluation-validity ri...

Details

Author
Aperivue
Repository
Aperivue/medsci-skills
Created
5 months ago
Last Updated
4 days ago
Language
Python
License
MIT

Bundled in these plugins

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

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).

1 Updated 3 weeks ago
sorawit-w
AI & Automation Listed

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.

35 Updated today
shipshitdev
Web & Frontend Featured

design-study

Study design and validity review for radiology and medical AI research. Identifies analysis unit, cohort logic, leakage risks, comparator design, validation strategy, and reporting guideline fit before drafting or submission.

292 Updated 4 days ago
Aperivue