Expert network

Experts, verified and re-tested.

Practising physicians, staff engineers, chartered accountants and commercial counsel author training data and grade model output. Under 2% of applicants are admitted, and every expert is re-calibrated weekly against seeded gold sets.

Last admissions cycle · illustrative

Applied
8,400
Credentials confirmed−87%
1,100
Passed the exam−63%
410
Passed the paid trial−54%
190
Admitted−16%
160
1.9%admitted. Bars drawn on a square-root scale.

01 · Vetting

Four stages of vetting

A CV gets an applicant to the first stage. Everything after it is confirmed with an issuer, timed, or paid for, and the last stage continues for as long as the expert stays.

V-01

Verified

With the issuing body

Licences, registrations and degrees are confirmed with the body that granted them, not read off a profile. Most applicants stop here.

V-02

Examined

Timed · set by the network

A timed exam written and marked by practitioners already in the network, pitched at the level of a senior colleague rather than a textbook.

V-03

Trialled

Paid · real tasks · blind-graded

Candidates do real work on a live project and are paid for it. Two existing experts grade the output blind against gold sets.

V-04

Re-calibrated

Weekly · for as long as they stay

Every expert grades a seeded gold set each week. Drift below threshold triggers retraining; persistent drift means removal from the network.

02 · What they produce

Author the training data, then evaluate the model

The same experts work at both ends of the pipeline, so the rubric a model is judged against was written by someone who also wrote the training data.

practitioners · authoringWriting

Author

Training data written by practitioners, with the reasoning recorded alongside the answer.

Worked differentialsclinical notes → ranked diagnoses with reasoning
Reference solutionsPR verdicts, fixes and tests for SWE evals
Audit & contract reasoningassertion → evidence chain → finding
Rubrics & gold setsthe standard every run is graded against
practitioners · evaluatingGrading

Evaluate

Professional judgement applied where string matching cannot separate correct from plausible.

Grade environment runsoutcome rubrics · side-effect checks
Rank outputs (RLHF)pairwise and listwise preference data
Red-teamdomain-specific failure hunting, documented
Audit datasetsthe final review before a dataset is delivered

03 · Coverage

Six verticals, staffed by practising specialists

Roles, not names. Everyone in the network practises now, or was recently senior, in the field they grade.

AdmittedUnder 2% of applicants
Re-calibratedWeekly, on seeded gold sets
LanguagesEnglish-first, multilingual grading panels
BaseRemote, across time zones
MD
Consultant physicianscardiology · oncology · radiology · emergency
Medical
SWE
Staff & principal engineerspayments · infra · ML systems
Code
OPS
Operations leadssupport · CRM · procurement
Company ops
CA
Chartered accountants & auditorsassurance · forensic · tax
Finance
LLB
Commercial counselcontracts · compliance · IP
Legal
LING
Linguists & phoneticiansspeech · dialect · diarisation QA
Audio
PhD
Research scientistsML · statistics · rubric design
Evals

04 · Engagement

Three engagement models

T-01

Dedicated team

Named experts · your tooling · months

A named group of experts assigned to your lab, working inside your annotation and evaluation tooling under your rubrics, with a DataOrigin lead.

T-02

Sprint pod

One deliverable · weeks

A gold set, a rubric, a red-team report. We staff the pod, run calibration, and hand over a finished, audited deliverable.

T-03

Grading bench

On demand · graded runs · days

Submit model outputs or environment runs. A calibrated panel grades them and returns scores with written reasoning per item.

Senior in medicine, law, engineering or finance? We pay practitioners to author and grade training data →