Evidence & Methods

Every technical claim should lead to something a reviewer can inspect.

This site is a presentation layer, not an alternate source of project truth. It explains the problem, decision, and relevance; project briefs and repositories retain the evidence, validation, implementation detail, status, and limitations.

Review Systems Use Demos

Evidence Model

From claim to source, without overstating the work

  1. 01
    State the problem and decision

    Start with the learning, assessment, operational, or analytical need—not a tool list.

  2. 02
    Name the system and contribution

    Describe what the public artifact establishes and keep ownership language within the available project evidence.

  3. 03
    Attach evidence and validation

    Link the working interface, report, source, tests, data contract, model card, or review packet that supports the statement.

  4. 04
    Preserve status and limits

    Distinguish a working public artifact from a review-gated prototype, planned extension, or production deployment.

2026 Q3 Proof Binding

Featured technical claims resolve to a Projects-owned evidence snapshot.

The current campaign selection is bound to portfolio-proof.v1 from Projects, generated August 17, 2026, with source fingerprint 75479d72822392455359e9517c0e2751d36256044adfb6cc5ccf956d7cb30566.

The snapshot contains seven projects and fourteen qualification-bound claims. Statistical Risk Modeling in R, Assessment Intelligence, and Assessment-to-Remediation Pipeline hold featured eligibility. Education Data Simulation Engine, Instructional AI Workflows, Content Intelligence, and Graduate Statistics Portfolio remain supporting. A different fingerprint requires a fresh review.

Reading The Portfolio

Evidence types stay distinct

Working artifact

Open and use it

A hosted dashboard, analytic workspace, report, or retrieval surface demonstrates a bounded public capability.

Review-gated prototype

Inspect the controls

The workflow demonstrates architecture and review behavior; it does not imply production integration or deployment.

Methods evidence

Follow the analysis

Model cards, reports, diagnostics, and validation artifacts show how conclusions were produced and constrained.

Public-safe boundary

Know what is excluded

Synthetic, generated, aggregated, sanitized, public, or permission-safe inputs keep private institutional records outside the portfolio.

Case-Study Template

A consistent review path

New and revised case studies should use this structure so a reviewer can evaluate relevance and proof without hunting across pages.

  1. 01Problem

    The need, user, and decision the work supports.

  2. 02Role

    The contribution established by project evidence.

  3. 03System

    The workflow, interfaces, and technical path.

  4. 04Evidence

    The artifacts, source, tests, and validation.

  5. 05Outcome

    What the artifact or analysis demonstrates.

  6. 06Limitations

    Prototype status, data boundary, and excluded claims.

Evidence Catalog

Start with the featured measurement and assessment proof

Featured · measurement

Statistical Risk Modeling in R

Model-family search, temporal validation, a locked holdout, decision guardrails, and stakeholder reporting—with below-target validity gates stated explicitly.

Review evidence
Featured · assessment analytics

Assessment Intelligence

A dbt/DuckDB layer, parity-controlled extracts, a hash-bound dashboard payload, privacy validation, and disclosure guardrails.

Review evidence
Featured · assessment technology

Assessment-to-Remediation Pipeline

The implemented 36-item authoring-review-export slice; scoring, attempts, remediation, reassessment, and mastery reporting remain planned.

Review evidence
Supporting · education data

Education Data Simulation Engine

A seven-year synthetic mathematics department, cross-table validation, Canvas-style records, a DuckDB star schema, and downstream marts.

Review evidence
Supporting · education AI

Instructional AI Workflows

An offline, deterministic, teacher-controlled rubric-to-feedback workflow that does not grade raw work automatically.

Review evidence
Supporting · governed retrieval

Content Intelligence

Provenance-rich objects, safety gates, lexical and vector records, and portable hybrid retrieval used by a public cited-answer demo.

Review evidence
Supporting · statistics

Graduate Statistics Portfolio

Public-safe nonlinear signal and clinical risk GLM analyses with model comparison, validation, calibration, diagnostics, and cautious interpretation.

Review evidence

Presentation Boundary

What lives here—and what stays with the repository

Portfolio site

Problem framing, intended audience, decision relevance, selected evidence, explicit status and limitations, demos, and a route to deeper inspection.

Project repository

Code, setup, tests, data contracts, model cards, detailed architecture, generated artifacts, validation logic, and implementation history.

Portfolio Helper Boundary

The reviewed source and the live corpus release separately.

The public-safe helper sources live with this site. Editing them does not update the live homepage helper by itself; a separate corpus rebuild, validation, and private Worker deployment must be reviewed and authorized independently.

Continue

Review the systems or discuss a learning-systems problem.

LinkedIn is the contact route. GitHub contains the public implementation evidence.

Connect on LinkedInReview GitHub