Human data specialist
The expert whose judgement becomes the model’s material
A human data specialist writes the reference answers and ranks the model’s own, within their own field, like an examiner whose annotated papers would go on to train the next examiners.
- Floor 1The Model
- P1Writes the brief, reads the code
- Emerging titleIt appeared recently. What it covers is not yet stable from one employer to the next.
What they answer for
The deliverableA body of preferences and reference answers, in one precise field. If they leave, the model lacks expert judgement, and nobody sees it before it is in use.
The profile
Five activities, scored 0 to 3- ResearchProducing knowledge that does not yet exist.
- BuildShipping a system that runs, deploys and breaks.
- OperateKeeping it in production: cost, incidents, drift, on-call.
- VerifyMeasuring, testing, attacking. Producing a verdict that holds.
- LeadDeciding, persuading, driving adoption, answering to others.
What the work is
The invisible trade
This is the least visible trade on the floor and one of the most decisive. A general-purpose model does not know what a good answer looks like in tax law, in cardiology or in industrial maintenance. Someone who does has to write it out, answer by answer, and that text becomes the material of training.
Why floor 1
It sits on the model floor although no code is written here, and it is the clearest off-diagonal case on the map. The criterion is not the technique used, it is the object answered for: here that is the model itself, its preferences, what it will hold to be good.
The trap
The trap is the confusion with piecework. Both exist under neighbouring names, with neither the same requirements nor the same conditions: a volume of ticks on one side, attested field expertise on the other. An advert asking for no qualification is describing the first.
A week in the role
- Writing reference answers in your field, often longer than you expected.
- Comparing two model answers, saying which is better, and explaining why.
- Discussing edge cases with other experts, when two judgements diverge.
- Re-reading your own criteria, because an unstated preference cannot be learned.
Ways in
- From a field role, with no detour through the technical side. That is the normal route, and it is open.
- A background in teaching or examining helps more here than a background in computing.
- What the role does not require: knowing how to program. Some engagements ask for it; most do not.
Reading an advert
2 signs- The advert asks for no field qualification and talks about volume.
- That is piecework, not this trade. The two do not compare on any axis.
- Nothing says who decides when two experts disagree.
- That is the central question of the post. With no written arbitration the body of work will be inconsistent, and you will carry the responsibility without having had the means.