Problem
Field change requests arrive as notes, photos metadata, and cost-risk estimates from multiple people. Before a change is approved, someone needs to validate required fields, catch duplicate submissions, and keep an evidence trail that survives a dispute.
Data boundary
Synthetic project data only, generated for this lab. No real client, contractor, or project data.
Pipeline
Ingest synthetic change-order record → validate owner, status, and cost-risk fields → detect duplicates → hold for owner approval → produce a review-ready evidence packet.
This pipeline shape mirrors the document-intake and validation-routing pattern in the NBCUniversal experience entry (ACCEPT/QUARANTINE/SYSTEM-failure routing) — connected here only because that pattern is already public evidence, not a new claim.
Validation rules
| Field | Rule | Sample value | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| change_order_id | Required, must be unique | CO-1042 | ACCEPT |
| owner | Required, must match an approved owner list | (missing) | QUARANTINE — missing owner |
| cost_risk_estimate | Required, numeric | "tbd" | QUARANTINE — non-numeric estimate |
| submission_hash | Must not duplicate a prior submission | matches CO-1039 | QUARANTINE — duplicate detected |
Output
A review-ready evidence packet per change order: validation outcome, duplicate status, and an approval boundary that keeps the decision with the project owner.
Failure modes
- Missing owner or status field → quarantined, never auto-approved.
- Duplicate submission → flagged and held, not silently merged.
- Non-numeric cost-risk field → rejected with a structured reason.
What this proves
Document intake, field validation, duplicate detection, and an owner-approval boundary applied to a construction/infrastructure-shaped change-management problem.
What it does not claim
This lab uses synthetic project data only. It does not claim experience with any specific contractor, project, or real construction dispute.
Suggested questions
- Hiring manager: "Show me the construction change-order evidence pattern."
- Buyer: "How would you validate messy intake data before automation?"