Skip to main content

Reviewing submissions

Assess the evidence and record a decision.

Review a submission to decide whether its evidence supports the requirement.

Open the requirement’s Submissions tab and choose a submission marked In review. Overview brings together its summary, requirement, evidence, and checks. Conversation records submissions and review decisions across revisions.

The summary explains the reasoning behind the model choice. The checks show how the recorded measurements compare with the requirement.

Assess the revision#

The revision selector identifies the saved evidence you are viewing. Review the current revision; use earlier revisions to understand what changed.

The quantized classifier reports 92% accuracy and 18.4 ms p95 latency, meeting the requirement’s numerical thresholds. To decide whether those results support the requirement, also inspect how they were produced:

  • Do both runs refer to the same model artifact?
  • Does the profile use the required device and measurement conditions?
  • Does the evaluation use the intended validation dataset?
  • Does the summary explain the choice, alternatives considered, and accepted tradeoffs?

Expand the checks to inspect the values and open the source runs for their settings and artifacts.

Use the revision’s saved evaluation to assess the submitted result. Source run links show the run’s current contents, including any changes made since submission.

Record a decision#

Select Review beside the revision selector. The form opens over the evidence so you can refer to it while writing your feedback.

  1. Add a note explaining your reasoning or what the author needs to change.
  2. Choose Accept if the evidence supports the requirement, or Request changes if it needs correction or more results. Requesting changes requires a note.
  3. Select Submit review. The decision and feedback appear with this revision and in Conversation.

Acceptance applies to this submission revision. Your organization’s wider process determines how it contributes to verification, validation, compliance, or release approval.

Follow the review history#

Open Conversation to read feedback and see how the submission progressed. Select a revision link to inspect the evidence associated with that event.

The reviewer asked for the reasoning behind the model choice. The author added the comparison, and the reviewer accepted the next revision.

Review a revised submission#

Read the updated summary and assess the new evidence against the earlier feedback. Each revision keeps its own evidence, evaluation, and review decision.

The selected revision shows its own feedback. View current version returns to the latest evidence.

The status beside the submission title describes the submission’s current state, even while you browse an earlier revision. Use the selected revision and its recorded decision when reading historical evidence.

Next steps#