RunsLab run · 2 November 2026, 09:28 UTC
The live judgment run
With the steps scripted and the judgment calls made by the live model, are incidents, fixes and reviews judged correctly?
4/5 passed1 inconclusive · 3 h 03 min
Setup
- Chains
- Satsuma lab chain
- RoleHome
- KeptLab, not retained
- RoleProving
- KeptLab, not retained
- Users
- UsersSynthetic
- Model
- Claude Opus
- ModeLive and replayed
- Operator seat
- SeatBy delegate
- Unattended
- Yes: nobody was watching to step in
- Time
- 3 h 03 min · ended 12:31 UTC
Checklist 5 items
Every item, unless its row says otherwise
- ChainLab
- UsersSynthetic
Reviewing its own products
2/3 passed
InconclusiveThe review of open issues decides each one
- DecisionsLive model
PassA real defect in a product is filed as an incident on that product
- DecisionsLive model
PassAn independent reviewer approves a sound fix
- DecisionsLive model
Handling a cross-chain outage
1/1 passed
PassA recovered outage is handled without a needless fix
- DecisionsLive model
Refusing products that break their own rules
1/1 passed
PassA product whose rules would be broken from the start is refused
- DecisionsLive model
What this proves
- Which judgment targets were met, partly met or missed in this run.
What it does not
- That the same judgments would be made every time: the model's answers can vary between runs.
What broke, what was fixed
The record of this run does not say whether a person stepped in, so it does not count as a run without repairs.
Cost in tokens
Not recorded: this run has no chain-derived scorecard.
Archived evidence
The lab chains this run used were reset afterwards and are not retained, so nothing here links to an explorer. The record below is the archived copy.
- Scorecard
- None archived.