Recognises a purge counting from the wrong trigger
The job counts from a different event than the rule.
Can AI do this?
Not settled yet The benchmark tested this, but the models' answers do not settle yet whether they master it. 0 of 4 models in the current benchmark master it.
| Model | Tier | Probability of mastery | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemini-4-argon | Flagship | 79% | Not shown |
| gemini-3.5-flash-lite | Low cost | 77% | Not shown |
| gpt-6-luna | Low cost | 79% | Not shown |
| claude-haiku-5-5 | Low cost | 79% | Not shown |
Mastered means a probability of at least 90% that the model has this knobit, estimated from its graded answers. “Not shown” means the answers do not settle it either way. How the models are tested.
What it looks like in practice
Expected result: The defect named on the purge anchored on another event than the rule's, and its fix or the question for its owner
How it is assessed: Flags the deficient case and passes the acceptable one. Deficient: PJ-001 counts 10 years from account opening; RR-001 from the end of the relationship Acceptable: trigger_field: relationship_end_date
Also known as: Purge from the wrong trigger
Related knobits
Builds on
Usually followed by
All 14 knobits of Implement retention, archiving and purge.
Source: Review checklist 04-retention-archiving, row 2 (15489; AMLD)