Loading workspace…
signed outSign in
Every requirement in bioskepsis-insights-user-requirements-v1.1.md, with the verdict the document’s own rules force. No requirement now carries the verdict BLOCKED. Each row carries both halves of its account, what is buildable and what is still held, and names the decisions that released it. A requirement answered the other way is DROPPED, and that is the one verdict nobody can go and change.
Showing the 9 requirements that NP-12 released. A requirement that the document alone would have held is here because a decision with a date let it through.
| ID | Verdict | Basis | What that means |
|---|---|---|---|
FR-TREND-05 | BUILD | stated | All of it, under the two minimums and the anonymity the answers set. A field signal is shown when at least 8 distinct people stand behind it (OQ-14) and, where it comes from OncoSkepsis, at least 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check (OQ-40, NP-12). Counts are rounded to the nearest 5. Nobody is named: a pharma user sees an anonymous card, and an identity is revealed only when the expert or clinician accepts a contact request, which is stored as a consent record naming the company and the wording shown (OQ-05, OQ-42). Still held. Nothing. Below either minimum there is nothing to show, and the view says so, naming the minimum rather than rendering an empty result that reads as a quiet field. |
X-01 | BUILD | inference | The cancer type named in a question, coded with OncoTree, whose code list version is stored on every signal (OQ-44). Still held. Nothing. Shown only above both minimums: 8 distinct contributing people (OQ-14) and 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check (OQ-40, NP-12), with counts rounded to the nearest 5 and the differencing check refusing an export or API answer whose comparison could reveal a hidden count (NP-10). |
X-03 | BUILD | inference | The tumour variant named in a question, in HGVS notation with a ClinGen Allele Registry ID (OQ-44). A variant-level signal is shown only above both minimums and rolls up to the gene otherwise (OQ-41), which is the whole of the re-identification control here. Still held. Nothing. Shown only above both minimums: 8 distinct contributing people (OQ-14) and 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check (OQ-40, NP-12), with counts rounded to the nearest 5 and the differencing check refusing an export or API answer whose comparison could reveal a hidden count (NP-10). |
X-04 | BUILD | inference | The drug, drug class or mechanism named in a question, coded with ChEMBL (OQ-44). ChEMBL is CC BY-SA 3.0, so anything derived from it that this product shares travels under the same licence. Still held. Nothing. Shown only above both minimums: 8 distinct contributing people (OQ-14) and 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check (OQ-40, NP-12), with counts rounded to the nearest 5 and the differencing check refusing an export or API answer whose comparison could reveal a hidden count (NP-10). |
X-06 | BUILD | inference | The country of the contributing clinician, which is what makes a country facet possible without a named person behind it. Still held. Nothing. Shown only above both minimums: 8 distinct contributing people (OQ-14) and 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check (OQ-40, NP-12), with counts rounded to the nearest 5 and the differencing check refusing an export or API answer whose comparison could reveal a hidden count (NP-10). |
X-10 | BUILD | inference | The counts themselves: questions, distinct contributing clinicians and distinct contributing institutions, which are what the two minimums are measured against. Still held. Nothing. Shown only above both minimums: 8 distinct contributing people (OQ-14) and 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check (OQ-40, NP-12), with counts rounded to the nearest 5 and the differencing check refusing an export or API answer whose comparison could reveal a hidden count (NP-10). |
NEVER-03 | BUILD | inference | All of it, confirmed by OQ-40: no institution name and no tumour-board name is attached to any clinical signal. What reaches this product is a count of distinct institutions, which is what the 3-institution minimum and the dominance check are measured against. Still held. Nothing. A count is not a name, and the dominance check exists precisely so that a count cannot be read back as one. |
XFER-09 | BUILD | inference | All of it, confirmed by OQ-40, which supplies both numbers: an OncoSkepsis signal is shown only when at least 3 institutions stand behind it and no single institution dominates, where dominance is the count minus the two largest institutional contributions falling under 5 percent of the largest (NP-12). The 8-person minimum of OQ-14 applies on top. Still held. Nothing. p is held in configuration, so a site that needs a stricter rule sets one rather than patching a literal. |
DATA-03 | BUILD | stated | All of it. The dashboard receives aggregated signals, and the two numbers that define 'aggregated' are now stated: at least 8 distinct people behind anything shown, with displayed counts rounded to the nearest 5 (OQ-14), and at least 3 distinct institutions with the 5 percent dominance check for anything from OncoSkepsis (OQ-40, NP-12). The thresholds apply in every view, export, alert and API answer, and the differencing check refuses an output whose comparison could reveal a count they hide (NP-10). Still held. Nothing. Individual-level data does not cross at all, which OQ-05 settles: the anonymous card is what a pharma user sees, and a name arrives only through the expert's own acceptance. |