How is a reading scored from what the person did?
Under AIRS-J/1, an Assessment reading follows published rules applied to what the person did. This section sets out what StepSim records, how recorded acts become observations, where a model may help, and what is never scored.
Built by Exeter Labs
Under AIRS-J/1, an Assessment reading follows published rules applied to what the person did. This section sets out what StepSim records, how recorded acts become observations, where a model may help, and what is never scored.
What is recorded
StepSim keeps the decision trace: decisions, artifacts, sources consulted, stated rationale, revisions and timings (8.7). Keystroke capture, affect inference, video analysis and biometric signals are never scoring inputs: "the Standard reads what a person did, which can be shown to them and explained" (8.7).
From acts to observations
StepSim applies the published rules of Annex F to the trace: "every level cites the events and the rule that produced it" (11.4). Under 11.2, rule-based scoring must give the same observations and levels for the same transcript, tested on every release. "An observation whose evidence cannot be pointed at does not exist" (8.8).
What is never scored
Nothing is scored from inferred motivation, attitude, confidence or personality (7.3), or from self-assessment, declared experience, training attendance or manager endorsement (8.2). A response given after a prompt cannot score above Level 1 (7.1); an approved access support does not limit the level (7.1.1).
Where a model is used
Under 11.4, a model-generated score "is not an observation and never stands alone". A model may propose a level with cited evidence. A qualified human assessor confirms or overrides it, with reasons. The model's proposal and the assessor's decision count as one observation, attributed to the assessor. A disagreement of more than one level goes to a second human assessor, whose decision is final. The result records the model-assisted proportion, and the register entry discloses it.
Evidence and appeal
For an Assessment, each dimension needs at least three independent observations from distinct decision points; two from one point count as one (8.3). StepSim requires at least three Assessment scenarios held back from practice and public material (8.4). The candidate receives the evidence cited for each observation, certified or not (12.5). An observation the transcript does not support is a ground for appeal (18.5, 18.6).
What this does not claim
This example assigns no level and makes no claim of readiness for certification. Session readings carry no level or band (20.3).
One fictional decision, in brief
A fictional example.
Mei Ling Wong, procurement lead at a food distributor, must recommend a packaging supplier to the tender committee by Thursday. PittaAI compares the bids: "Supplier B holds the food-contact safety certificate the tender requires. Based on Supplier B's website. I am 90 percent sure."
The claim is the supplier's own. Mei Ling asks Supplier B for the certificate and checks it with the issuing body. The certificate expired in June. She recommends no award to Supplier B until it shows a current certificate. She tells the committee which claims she verified, which she did not, and that an AI tool drafted the comparison. Three months later, the tender form she revised asks every bidder for the certificate number and issuer.
The trace would hold: read the claim, asked for the certificate, checked with the issuer, stated the basis, disclosed AI use, added a form check. One decision gives at most one observation per dimension; an Assessment needs at least three per dimension. Mei Ling gets no level, band, composite or confidence.
<!-- R69, R70: when merged into the instrument page, the section takes an H2 beneath the page H1, with no duplicate page eyebrow and no closing action. -->
AIR APAC publishes the standard for judgment in AI-enabled work, certifies people against it through its official instrument, and stands behind every result. Exeter Labs builds and operates StepSim, AIR APAC's official assessment instrument. The owner of AIR APAC also owns Exeter Labs.