Alpha This system is experimental. Scores and classifications are early-stage research and may be unreliable. Methodology → home / users / 2noame 2noame 468 karma
11y 9m on HN
HN profile →
▶ Evaluate All (1)
Coverage
We've seen 2 of
~94 submissions
Full eval: 1 Lite-only: 1 Unevaluated: 0
Deep Read
section-level analysis · 1 full evaluation
HRCB +0.58
range 0.00 · +100% / 0% / 0%− E-full / S +0.51 / +0.50 SETL 0.00 Signals EQ 0.53 SO 0.68 TD 0.67
UDHR Fingerprint Preamble: +0.50 Freedom & Equality: +0.60 Non-Discrimination: +0.50 Life & Liberty: +0.40 No Slavery: ND No Torture: ND Legal Personhood: ND Equal Protection: +0.50 Right to Remedy: ND No Arbitrary Detention: ND Fair Hearing: ND Presumption of Innocence: ND Privacy: ND Freedom of Movement: +0.30 Asylum: ND Nationality: ND Marriage & Family: ND Property: +0.40 Freedom of Thought: ND Free Expression: +0.60 Assembly: +0.40 Political Participation: +0.50 Social Security: +0.85 Work & Pay: +0.75 Rest & Leisure: +0.50 Standard of Living: +0.85 Education: +0.70 Culture & Science: +0.60 Social Order: +0.50 Duties: +0.40 No Destruction of Rights: ND
Quick Scan
holistic editorial estimate · 1 lite evaluation
Editorial [E]: +0.30
Llama · truncated content · holistic (not section-level)
Lens divergence detected
Quick scan (+0.30 )
vs full evaluation (+0.51 )
· Δ 0.21
The holistic Llama estimate and section-level Claude evaluation disagree by more than 0.15.
The full evaluation is more reliable for individual story analysis.
2 stories