What changes when a model returns a typed judgment?
A local lab for exploring typed answers, probabilities and policy in authored business cases.
Status
The lab puts a typed Jev judgment and its probability beside the policy code that acts on it, so each can be inspected on its own, using synthetic business cases.
In practice
Keep a model’s judgment and the policy that acts on it separate, so each can be inspected.
Why this question matters
A model judgment still needs a policy around it. Typed answers and probabilities make that handoff concrete enough to inspect in code.
What I built
A teaching and experiment workbench around TypeSafe’s Jev judgment model, with synthetic cases and inspectable decision records.
A design choice
The model judges and code decides. Approval, evidence expiry and authority checks stay in code, so withdrawing approval holds the simulated action without a new model call. Letting the model’s answer trigger the action would be shorter, but a confident answer can still be wrong. The lab includes a deliberately confident, wrong example to show it.
Where the evidence stops
An experimental workbench. Authored cases and owner-recorded observations do not establish business ROI or production readiness.