Encounter Orchestrator
Waiting for protocol materials.
Breakdown Scenario Agent
No scenario queue.
Relationship and Power Agent
No relationship check.
Boundary and Handoff Agent
No boundary review.
Inspectable audit plan Material-routed tasks, tools, dependencies, and stop conditions
No encounter map yet
Add protocol materials or load the sample, then build the map.
Framework-grounded ethics map
Belmont baseline, conditional Menlo and NIST AI RMF extensions, with VSD and ESR process support.
Evidence coverage at a glance
Click a donut segment or count to filter the framework map. Coverage describes submitted material, not ethical quality or approval.
How to read a source label: “Interview questions · passage 1” means the first numbered excerpt taken from the Interview questions field. The hidden internal ID (for example INT-001) is only a traceability reference—not a risk or approval score.
Saved analysis: charts reflect the current protocol case.
Active cited frameworks
Select a petal to inspect its question and submitted evidence.
Framework-linked Trade-off Board
Compare each design parameter by current leaning, connected ethics dimensions, downstream document impact, and the expert role that should review unresolved risk. The board is the decision surface; the relationship map is optional context.
Show optional framework relationship overview
Foundational ethics / VSD / ESRMenlo ICT extensionNIST AI RMF extensionGreen / amber / red outline = documented / partial / missing evidence
Visualization rationale: adapted from the synthesized-data principle of An et al.'s Dandelion Diagram (CHI EA 2020); SafeBARS keeps the relationship overview but adds a decision board because ethics trade-offs need inspectable consequences, not only spatial attention patterns.
Application draft readiness
A completeness scaffold, never an ethics verdict or institutional form.
Participant journey stress map
Switch lenses to compare written protocol coverage with scenario-test outcomes.
Covered in selected lensPartial or untested in CombinedMissing or audit gapNo scenario resultExcluded from scopeNumber inside each node = linked tests run
Encounter stages
Edit scope and responsibility before running scenarios.
Scenario queue
Bounded test conditions, not predictions.
No scenario results yet
Select difficult situations in the encounter map, then choose “Run selected traces”.
No researcher decisions yet
After a scenario test finds a protocol gap or ambiguity, it will appear here with a proposed change.
Expert review is not needed yet
Run the audit first. If a question requires human judgment, SafeBARS will create a review request here.