<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: TuringCorp</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by TuringCorp (@turingcorp).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/turingcorp</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/turingcorp"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>The confidence number is the product (and here is ours, with the caveat)</title>
      <dc:creator>TuringCorp</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 13:35:40 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/turingcorp/the-confidence-number-is-the-product-and-here-is-ours-with-the-caveat-4mmk</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/turingcorp/the-confidence-number-is-the-product-and-here-is-ours-with-the-caveat-4mmk</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Most AI tools answer the question. The harder job is judging between two answers you already have: two drafts, two plans, two offers. You usually lean one way already — what you cannot do is price your own uncertainty.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;That is the only thing we built: &lt;strong&gt;Decider&lt;/strong&gt;, a judge that takes a question plus two candidate answers and returns the stronger one, a calibrated confidence value, and the reasoning for the call.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  The number is the product, and it comes with a caveat
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Here is the part most products would leave out. On raw pick rate, Decider &lt;strong&gt;ties&lt;/strong&gt; a plain single-model baseline — roughly 92.5% against 92.7% on JudgeBench. We do not claim to be more accurate.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;What a single pass cannot give you is &lt;em&gt;how close the call was&lt;/em&gt;. Every judgment carries a confidence value calibrated against outcomes:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"&gt;&lt;table&gt;
&lt;thead&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;th&gt;Confidence reported&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;th&gt;Share of judgments&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;th&gt;Observed accuracy&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/thead&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;≥ 90%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;45.6%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;strong&gt;99.6%&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;80–90%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;29.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;94.0%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;70–80%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;13.2%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;84.1%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&amp;lt; 70%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;10.5%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;67.7%&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;JudgeBench, 614 judgments. These are our own runs on the official protocol; the runs that failed are disclosed rather than dropped, and the raw judgments are published.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Two outcomes, both useful
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A high band is permission to commit and stop re-reading both options. A low band is not a failure — it is the answer you actually needed: the two are genuinely close, so take the one you already preferred and spend your time somewhere else. Terminating the comparison is the value.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Judge it on real work, not a demo script
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;We recorded 27 real runs across nine domains — writing, engineering, business, research, career, money, people, travel, everyday — and published each one end to end: the question, both candidate answers, the pick, the confidence and the full reasoning, verbatim. They are browsable as static pages:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href="https://api.turingcorp.net/platform/poe/examples" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://api.turingcorp.net/platform/poe/examples&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Nothing is charged for reading them, and the same set ships inside the app as free recorded runs.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Try it
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Decider runs as an app on Poe: &lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href="https://poe.com/TuringCorp-Decider" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://poe.com/TuringCorp-Decider&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; — pay per decision, no subscription (list $0.50, launch offer $0.25). What it is, how it is measured and what it costs: &lt;a href="https://api.turingcorp.net/platform/poe" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://api.turingcorp.net/platform/poe&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If your pipeline needs a quality gate rather than a chat, there is also an OpenAI-compatible endpoint: &lt;a href="https://api.turingcorp.net/" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://api.turingcorp.net/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Disclosure: this post is written by the team that builds Decider.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>ai</category>
      <category>llm</category>
      <category>machinelearning</category>
      <category>tools</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
