Proposes a diagnostic metric to quantify the discrepancy between macro-averaged benchmark scores and experienced reliability in deployment. It accounts for uneven task coverage by measuring the dispersion of error rates across domains, highlighting how gap-uniform evaluation can misstate actual user experience. Use when the user has predictions and gold and needs to compute CV_d(e_d).
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill aj_jaggedness_penalty --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Aj Jaggedness Penalty?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-aj-jaggedness-penalty)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: aj_jaggedness_penalty
description: Proposes a diagnostic metric to quantify the discrepancy between macro-averaged benchmark scores and experienced reliability in deployment. It accounts for uneven task coverage by measuring the dispersion of error rates across domains, highlighting how gap-uniform evaluation can misstate actual user experience. Use when the user has predictions and gold and needs to compute CV_d(e_d).
metadata:
skill_kind: metric
source_arxiv: 2601.07573
bibtex_key: gans2026model
confidence: high
---
# aj_jaggedness_penalty
> A Model of Artificial Jagged Intelligence — Joshua S. Gans (arXiv:2601.07573, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Proposes a diagnostic metric to quantify the discrepancy between macro-averaged benchmark scores and experienced reliability in deployment. It accounts for uneven task coverage by measuring the dispersion of error rates across domains, highlighting how gap-uniform evaluation can misstate actual user experience.
## Datasets
- (no dataset; pure metric skill)
## Metrics
- `CV_d(e_d)` **(primary)** — range: other
- Coefficient of variation of domain-level error rates, calculated as sqrt(Var(e_d))/E[e_d], where e_d = 1 - s_d. Used as a diagnostic for the inspection wedge between benchmark averages and experienced reliability.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Per-domain benchmark scores s_d(m) and domain-level error rates e_d = 1 - s_d.
**Output**: A single dispersion statistic (CV_d(e_d)) or a deployment-weighted score S^dep(m).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_jaggedness_penalty(scores_per_domain):
errors = [1 - s for s in scores_per_domain]
mean_err = sum(errors) / len(errors)
var_err = sum((e - mean_err)**2 for e in errors) / len(errors)
return (var_err ** 0.5) / mean_err
```
## Common pitfalls
- Assuming macro-averaged benchmark scores reflect deployment reliability without checking domain exposure distribution.
- Treating long-tail benchmarks like BIG-bench as representative of average-case performance rather than tail-risk modules.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> If only an unweighted or uniform-weight benchmark is available, one can report a dispersion statistic across domains, such as CV_d(e_d) for domain-level error rates e_d ≡ 1-s_d. In settings where domain size and domain error are positively associated (the AJI mechanism), CV_d(e_d) is informative about how far the macro-average can drift from experienced reliability.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{gans2026model,
title={A Model of Artificial Jagged Intelligence},
author={Joshua S. Gans},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2601.07573}
}
```
- arXiv: 2601.07573
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!