Human judgment for the tasks your grader cannot score.
Recruit qualified people and domain experts for open-ended tasks, demonstrations, comparisons, and structured evaluation. Use human feedback where programmatic graders stop being enough, with screening and managed support matched to the work.
Some of the most important tasks do not have one right answer.
Open-ended tasks like writing, negotiation, prioritization, and judgment under ambiguity often require human evaluation. The challenge is finding the right people and creating a process that produces useful, repeatable feedback.
Open-ended tasks need judgment
Not every task can be scored with exact match or a deterministic verifier. Open-ended work often requires people to assess quality, relevance, or judgment.
Expertise changes the answer
For specialized work, the quality of the feedback depends on who is doing the evaluation. Domain knowledge and task experience can materially change the answer.
Consistency matters over time
When you compare models or releases, the audience, criteria, and study design need to be stable enough to make the results useful over time.
Bring the right humans into open-ended evaluation.
Use our network, platform, and services to recruit qualified people for the tasks your automated graders cannot reliably score. Add domain expertise, custom screening, and managed support when the work gets more specialized.
Qualified human evaluators
Recruit people based on role, experience, credentials, domain knowledge, or task-specific screening, with managed vetting available for harder-to-find audiences.
Expert demonstrations
Collect examples of how qualified people complete, approach, or reason through complex tasks to support training, evaluation, or reference work.
Comparative judgments
Ask participants to compare outputs, rank alternatives, or evaluate which response better meets the criteria that matter for the task.
Structured human ratings
Collect rubric-based feedback when a task requires human judgment rather than a programmatic check, with the evaluation approach defined during project scoping.
Specialized cohorts
Build groups of professionals or domain experts for technical, industry-specific, or low-incidence work that general-purpose panels may not reach.
Repeat evaluation programs
Run comparable studies over time using similar audiences and evaluation criteria as models, task suites, and quality expectations evolve.
The quality of human feedback starts with who provides it.
Reach broad consumer audiences, technology professionals, and hard-to-find specialists. Add professional verification, custom screening, and managed recruiting when the task requires deeper expertise.
7.6M
People in the network
205K+
Technology professionals
34K+
AI training sessions, 12 months
Your engagement stays scoped to your work.
Tasks, materials, and study data are handled within the specific engagement. Participants are recruited and consented for the work they are asked to complete, with additional handling available for sensitive or specialized projects.
No model conflict
We do not build foundation models or RL environments. Our role is to provide the human input your work requires.
Engagement-level isolation
Customer materials and study data stay within the engagement and are not pooled into a shared commercial dataset.
Project-specific consent
Participants are recruited and consented for the work they are asked to complete, with additional handling available for specialized projects.
Start where your automated grader stops.
Tell us the task, the expertise required, and what kind of human input you need. We can help identify the right audience, screening approach, study design, and level of managed support.
Frequently asked questions
Can’t find the answer you’re looking for? Talk to our team.
Can this work with our harness?
Integration depends on the workflow. Human feedback can be delivered in agreed formats, and API or custom delivery options can be scoped where available.
How do you handle rater disagreement?
The evaluation design can include multiple reviewers, defined criteria, and a process for handling disagreement. The exact approach depends on the task and project scope.
Is this fast enough for training?
It depends on the use case. Human evaluation is well suited to offline training, benchmarking, reference work, and periodic model evaluation. Timing depends on audience complexity and volume.
Who qualifies as an expert here?
Qualification depends on the task. We can use profile data, custom screeners, professional verification, and hands-on vetting for specialized audiences.
Can we run comparable studies later?
Yes. Participants can be recontacted for repeat studies where appropriate, and comparable cohorts can be recruited over time. Availability depends on the audience and study design.
Do you build environments too?
No. We focus on providing the human participants and expertise that environment and model teams need for training, evaluation, and research.
