Humanevaluation
For language models & AI product teams
Human review of English-language model outputs. Pinewell compares responses, checks supporting evidence and returns ratings with written reasons against your rubric.
Discuss an evaluation projectReview model outputs
Response evaluation, evidence checks & quality review
Response evaluation
Compare model responses against the prompt and your criteria. Reviewers record a rating and explain which part of the response supports the decision.
Response evaluation servicesHuman verification
Check whether factual statements are supported by the permitted sources. Record the evidence, its limits and claims that need clarification.
Source and claim checksContent quality
Review clarity, terminology and consistency in English outputs, help content and customer information, with unclear passages referred for review.
English content reviewManaged review.
Documented decisions.
Your team defines the task. Pinewell organises the review around an agreed guide, a calibration round and a clear route for uncertain cases.
Each review record includes the decision, supporting reason and unresolved questions.
Our quality processCalibrate before batch work
Use a representative sample to resolve ambiguous criteria and agree how ratings should be explained.
Review against the brief
Compare responses, check permitted sources and flag uncertainty within the client's instructions.
Check & hand over
A quality lead reviews selected work and referred cases. Revisions and unresolved questions are recorded with the handover.
Outputs your team can use
Agreed formats, traceable evidence & concise rationale
Ratings & comparisons
The preferred response, the relevant rubric criterion and a written explanation.
Claim-check records
The statement reviewed, its supporting source and the limits of the evidence.
Quality feedback
Revised decisions, reviewer feedback and questions that need a project-owner decision.
Evaluation resources
Practical guidance for review programmes
- Write a brief reviewers can actually useDefine the task, source rules and required output.
- When two reviewers disagreeSeparate a missed detail from an ambiguous criterion.
- A source can be relevant without supporting the claimMatch each statement to the evidence that supports it.
Scope your human review project
Bring a sample, your rubric and the output format you need.