Skip to main content
Core8–14 hours

Verified AI Analytics Workflow

Build an analytics workflow for CSV and SQL with verified calculations, provenance, privacy controls, and a reproducible executive report.

analytical promptingSQL validationdata qualityprovenanceprivacyreporting

Scenario

Task

An analyst receives a CSV file and a SQL extract and must prepare findings for leadership. AI helps explore the data, but every number and claim must be verified and reproducible.

Step-by-step execution

1. Run a data audit

Outcome: Data quality, field semantics, and privacy risks are known before analysis begins.

Tasks

  • Document the schema
  • Check missing values and duplicates
  • Mark PII
  • Record business definitions

Checks

  • Metrics have unambiguous definitions
  • Sensitive fields are not sent to the model without need

2. Build the analysis plan

Outcome: Hypotheses and required calculations are separated from AI-generated narrative.

Tasks

  • Formulate the questions
  • Define SQL queries or formulas
  • Add sanity checks
  • Record expected ranges

Checks

  • Every conclusion has planned evidence
  • AI does not perform hidden calculations inside narrative text

3. Execute and verify the analysis

Outcome: Results are reproducible independently of the model.

Tasks

  • Run SQL or Python calculations
  • Compare totals
  • Check edge segments
  • Save queries and outputs

Checks

  • Key numbers have deterministic verification
  • Aggregation levels are not mixed

4. Create an evidence-first report

Outcome: The narrative stays within the boundaries of the evidence.

Tasks

  • Link claims to evidence
  • Add caveats
  • Mark uncertainty
  • Run an adversarial review

Checks

  • Unsupported claims are removed
  • The report can be reproduced from the artifacts

Acceptance criteria

  • Data contract and definitions are recorded
  • Key numbers are verified with deterministic code
  • Every conclusion has provenance
  • Privacy controls are applied
  • The executive report includes caveats and confidence

Assessment rubric

How the result is assessed

Passing score: 70/100 · Distinction: 90/100

Data contract and quality

Schema, definitions, privacy, and quality rules are explicit.

25 points

Insufficient

Fields and metrics are ambiguous.

Competent

Definitions and checks are documented.

Strong

A reusable metric layer and automated data tests are implemented.

Evidence required

  • ✓ Link to code or artifact
  • ✓ README with decisions
  • ✓ Test output or runtime evidence
  • ✓ Data contract

Calculation verification

Key figures are reproducible with deterministic code.

30 points

Insufficient

The model generates figures in prose.

Competent

Key metrics are verified.

Strong

Independent reconciliation and regression checks are in place.

Evidence required

  • ✓ Link to code or artifact
  • ✓ README with decisions
  • ✓ Test output or runtime evidence
  • ✓ SQL/Python calculations

Claim provenance

Claims are linked to a query, formula, or source slice.

25 points

Insufficient

Conclusions lack evidence.

Competent

Every key claim has provenance.

Strong

Lineage is generated automatically.

Evidence required

  • ✓ Link to code or artifact
  • ✓ README with decisions
  • ✓ Test output or runtime evidence
  • ✓ Evidence table

Executive report quality

The report includes caveats and confidence and stays within the evidence.

20 points

Insufficient

Unsupported claims are present.

Competent

Claims, caveats, and uncertainty are explicit.

Strong

Adversarial review and an audience-specific summary are included.

Evidence required

  • ✓ Link to code or artifact
  • ✓ README with decisions
  • ✓ Test output or runtime evidence
  • ✓ Final report