Editing
Corpus/Quality
(section)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Two quality axes == The system tracks two independent quality dimensions: === 1. Content quality (tags.content_quality on corpus documents) === Quality of the text in <code>body</code>. Progression: {| class="wikitable" ! Level !! Description !! Searchable? !! Reliable for display? |- | ocr_raw || OCR extraction, errors likely || Degraded FTS || No -- warn user |- | ocr_cleaned || OCR cleaned by regex or LLM || Better FTS || Partially |- | native_raw || Native text (PDF text layer, .doc), structure lost || Good FTS || Yes, but no structure |- | native_structured || Structured source (HTML Legifrance, XML Akoma Ntoso) || Optimal FTS || Yes |- | machine_reviewed || Reviewed/corrected by LLM || Optimal FTS || Yes |- | human_reviewed || Reviewed by a human || Optimal FTS || Yes |- | jurist_reviewed || Validated by a jurist || Optimal FTS || Yes (gold standard) |} Only the current level is stored. Progression is one-way (except disputes). === 2. Annotation confidence (on graph.annotations -- future, documented here for reference) === Quality of knowledge graph annotations. Separate from content quality. {| class="wikitable" ! Method !! Confidence !! Meaning |- | stub || stub || Placeholder, not yet created |- | llm || memory_only || LLM-generated, not verified against source |- | llm || source_checked || Verification pass confirmed citation exists |- | llm || cross_validated || Cross-validation confirmed consistency |- | human || (any) || Non-expert human reviewed |- | jurist || (any) || Legal professional validated |} Progression: stub -> memory_only -> source_checked -> cross_validated. Can be downgraded to <code>disputed</code>. === How they interact === A corpus document has content_quality. An annotation on that document has its own confidence. The weakest link determines the trust of any reasoning path: * An annotation with confidence=cross_validated on a document with content_quality=ocr_raw is still unreliable (the source text may have OCR errors that corrupted the annotation). * A high-quality document (native_structured) with a stub annotation has no knowledge graph coverage yet.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Dura Lex Wiki are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (see
Dura Lex Wiki:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Page
Discussion
English
Views
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Page information