DP7

Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/7#DP7
Properties
Instance of
DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint
Decision Point Id
DP7
Decision question
Should Engineer B conduct a full independent technical review of the AI-assisted design documents before sealing, or apply a standard supervisory review comparable to reviewing conventional CAD-produced work?
Focus
Engineer B must decide what level of review to apply to design documents that Engineer A produced with substantial AI assistance, before affixing a seal as the responsible charge engineer.
Option1
Review every substantive element of the AI-assisted design documents independently, verifying calculations, safety features, and code compliance before sealing, treating AI-generated content as requiring the same scrutiny as work from an unfamiliar subconsultant.
Option2
Apply the firm's existing quality assurance protocols to the AI-assisted documents at the same level used for conventional CAD-produced work, relying on Engineer A's advanced environmental domain competence and intermediate verification proficiency as a reasonable internal check.
Option3
Commission a focused third-party technical review of safety-critical and AI-generated design elements while applying standard supervisory review to the remaining portions, balancing thoroughness with practical resource constraints.
Role
Engineer B Mentor Engineer
TTL
@prefix case7: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/7#> . @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> . @prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> . @prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> . @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> . @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> . case7:DP7 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint, owl:NamedIndividual ; rdfs:label "DP7" ; proeth:decisionPointId "DP7" ; proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer B conduct a full independent technical review of the AI-assisted design documents before sealing, or apply a standard supervisory review comparable to reviewing conventional CAD-produced work?" ; proeth:focus "Engineer B must decide what level of review to apply to design documents that Engineer A produced with substantial AI assistance, before affixing a seal as the responsible charge engineer." ; proeth:option1 "Review every substantive element of the AI-assisted design documents independently, verifying calculations, safety features, and code compliance before sealing, treating AI-generated content as requiring the same scrutiny as work from an unfamiliar subconsultant." ; proeth:option2 "Apply the firm's existing quality assurance protocols to the AI-assisted documents at the same level used for conventional CAD-produced work, relying on Engineer A's advanced environmental domain competence and intermediate verification proficiency as a reasonable internal check." ; proeth:option3 "Commission a focused third-party technical review of safety-critical and AI-generated design elements while applying standard supervisory review to the remaining portions, balancing thoroughness with practical resource constraints." ; proeth:roleLabel "Engineer B Mentor Engineer" ; prov:wasAttributedTo "claude-sonnet-4-6" ; prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 7 Extraction" .
Metadata
Type
Individual
Last Updated
2026-06-05 09:38
Attributed to
claude-sonnet-4-6
Generated by
ProEthica Case 7 Extraction