Example · Assurance or evaluation practitioner
Which claims need fresh evidence after this decoder update?
An assurance practitioner traces a proposed software change back to the conditions of an existing assessment
The situation
Reviewing a software change
A fictional BCI developer proposes a decoder update for a communication system. You can inspect the saved assessment and the change description as part of a defined evaluation assignment. Your immediate task is to identify which existing claims still have a relevant evidence basis and which require further examination
What this example starts with
- Available
- The previous assessment describes an intended use, system boundary and supporting validation material
- Unresolved
- The update description has not yet been matched to all affected claims and operating conditions
- Constraint
- Your review covers the specified change and supplied artifacts, not every aspect of the product
Working through the question
Establish the reviewed baseline
Read the Project Briefing and identify the software version, intended people, task and conditions to which the supporting sources apply. Record the assessment date and any missing baseline details. Without that context, an unchanged summary cannot show that earlier validation remains relevant to the update
Trace the consequential changes
Compare the change description with the claims under review. Ask whether decoding behaviour, calibration, error handling or dependencies may change, and request evidence where the description is unclear. Keep a claimed improvement separate from demonstrated performance in the actual evaluation context
Specify the evidence needed
For each potentially affected claim, state which artifact, test condition or explanation would support further review. Consider how an interrupted update or need to return to a previous version would be handled. These are proposed evaluation questions, not tests that Compass has performed
An illustrative take-away
A change review record
Your record links the proposed change, affected claim and remaining evidence request
- Which earlier validation conditions still match the updated system?
- What evidence addresses altered errors or calibration demands?
- What remains outside this review even if those requests are answered?
Written for this example to show what the reader could take into their next conversation
An assessment or Passport does not constitute independent testing, certification or approval of the change
Try this with your own question
Your guide explains the steps, access requirements and limits for your role