Skip to content

Compliance page's Article 10 card advertises 'bias detection' / 'quality/PII/bias scan' (and a leakage gate) that no code implements (CR-A18-008) #457

Open

Description

@cemililik

Wave 1 · theme D1-9: Compliance mappings and marketing language · highest severity High · 1 finding(s) · effort small

Summary

A compliance officer cites the site as evidence that an automated bias scan runs as part of Article 10 governance; no such scan exists.

Primary finding

CR-A18-008 — Compliance page's Article 10 card advertises 'bias detection' / 'quality/PII/bias scan' (and a leakage gate) that no code implements

severity High · reachability default · intent contract-violation · confidence confirmed · independently confirmed · reproduced end to end

What happens. compliance.art10.body (compliance.html:149, translations.js:3855 + locales) and the artefact-tree label at compliance.html:280 claim bias detection. forgelm/data_audit has no bias analysis; the only bias item is operator-declared data.governance.known_biases passed through (config.py:792-793, compliance.py:662). C-1833 adds that cross-split leakage is reported but never gates; C-1364 adds the uncalled export_evidence_bundle and missing conformity scaffolding.

Where.

Evidence.

  • A grep for bias under forgelm/ finds no detector. data_audit_report.json keys contain no bias block and the string 'bias' does not appear in the report. A train/validation corpus with verbatim leakage gave success true and EXIT=0 while cross_split_leakage_pairs listed ['train__validation'].

Recommended fix. Reword to 'operator-declared known biases recorded'; remove or expose the evidence-bundle and conformity claims.

Acceptance criteria

  • A regression test reproduces the failure scenario and asserts the corrected behaviour.
  • Documentation listed above is corrected in English and in its Turkish mirror in the same PR.
  • Every finding in this issue is resolved or explicitly closed with a reason.

Found by the October 2026 ForgeLM code and documentation review against commit cab2947. Code links point at that commit; line numbers may have moved since. Finding IDs (CR-…, DOC-…, TECH-…) are stable references for this backlog.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    area: siteCode area: sitebugSomething isn't workingseverity: highWrong behaviour or a false claim users rely onsource: review-2026-10Found by the October 2026 code and documentation reviewwave: 1Roadmap wave 1: high severity, small effort

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions