Rules & reference
Full original catalog input & implementation metadata
Cited evidence fields
Exact classifier output
Classifier instructions
Your review
One required question: does the selection verdict make sense for this behavior? The rest is optional. Judge this exact game variant against the target definition. This is unblinded expert review, not observed gameplay.
What counts as a fitting verdict?
Answer Yes if the classifier’s category is appropriate: direct relevance needs no change; parameter variation uses existing settings; rule/engine mutation changes mechanics. For “not relevant” or “insufficient evidence”, Yes means you agree with that negative or uncertain classification—not that the game elicits the behavior.
Judge proposed changes separately: are they concrete, feasible, and likely to create an opportunity for the specified behavior while preserving a recognizable version of the game? New rule explanations below the original input are reviewer context, not extra information given to the classifier.
If you cannot judge, save a draft or skip with a reason rather than guessing Yes or No. Skips remain missing data, not negative labels. Work independently and retain your private resume link.