Review Workspace

RhetoricScore Review Lab

Review already-generated annotations and mappings for future Gold Data. Start from the source text and its context, compare the original label with the RhetoricScore mapping, then decide whether the item should be accepted, rejected, remapped, or kept uncertain.

Reviewer question

Is this annotation or mapping usable for Gold Data?

Dataset Queue

Choose Review Set

1 / 25
cocolofa / test cocolofa / train cocolofa / validation cognitive / cognitive_benchmark_alpha cognitive / cognitive_benchmark_v0_sample semeval2020_task11 / test semeval2020_task11 / train semeval2020_task11 / validation
Step 1 · Source

cognitive / cognitive_benchmark_alpha

1 / 25
Sample fallback applied: missing labels_original; empty fallback used; missing labels_rhetoric; empty fallback used; missing techniques; empty fallback used

Full article text is not available in metadata or local source files.

Step 2 · Annotation

Compare Original Label and RhetoricScore Mapping

Review Target
Original Dataset Labels
None provided
RhetoricScore Mapped Labels
None provided
Detected / Imported Techniques
None detected
Annotation Quality
Not provided
Mapping Confidence
Not provided
Decision focus

Review the mapping and annotation quality. You do not need to judge whether the source text is factually true.

Next sample
Internal Reference

Review Item Details

Diagnostics
Review Item ID
cog-alpha-001
Source Type
human
Language
en
Reference Context
Default

Source URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/

Source Context

Article Metadata

Article ID
cog-alpha-001
Title
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Full article text is not available in metadata or local source files.

Summary
Review the precomputed dataset sample without changing scoring.
Reading Level: review only

Context Summary: Loaded from the existing review dataset.

Scores

Rhetorical Scores

High Variance Low Variance Reference Zone

Score data describing the text's rhetorical signals compared with the selected reference context.

Scores not available for this input.
Rhetorical Stability
N/A

No precomputed stability score is available for this review sample.

Detected Patterns

Detected Rhetorical Patterns

No unusual rhetorical patterns were detected in this sample.
Experimental Layer

Cognitive Quality Signals (Experimental)

Signal Status
Not_available
Language
en
Reference Context
Default
Explainability Details

Explainability Details (η Coefficients & Context Modifiers)

Detected Technique Domain Core Frequency Saturated Score Final Weight Alpha Context Eta Applied
No detailed explainability table is available for this result.
Raw metadata / debug 
{
  "collection_status": "placeholder",
  "source_id": "cog-src-001",
  "title": "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy",
  "url": "https://plato.stanford.edu/"
}
Unknown Preserved Fields 
{
  "expected_quality_band": null,
  "source_category": "expert_expository",
  "source_type": "human"
}
Inspect Backend Response (Diagnostic RAW JSON) 
{
  "id": "cog-alpha-001",
  "source_category": "expert_expository",
  "source_type": "human",
  "language": "en",
  "text": "Placeholder expert expository passage for Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. It should later be replaced with a short licensed or permissible excerpt that explains a concept with careful distinctions and evidence.",
  "expected_quality_band": null,
  "metadata": {
    "source_id": "cog-src-001",
    "title": "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy",
    "url": "https://plato.stanford.edu/",
    "collection_status": "placeholder"
  }
}