Classification criteria

The exact questions Jev is asked about every record, the options it chooses between, and the thresholds that turn its answers into outcomes. Rubric version 2026.10-r1.

Also available as machine-readable JSON.

What Jev is given

Each record is sent as a small structured “state”. It contains no MLA name and no party. For example, for a written question:

{
  "record_type": "A question tabled by a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly for written answer by a minister",
  "setting": "To the Minister for Communities — Department: Department for Communities",
  "date": "2026-09-01",
  "text": "To ask the Minister for Communities …"
}

Record types are described to the model as follows:

Written questions: A question tabled by a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly for written answer by a minister
Oral questions: A question tabled by a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly for oral answer by a minister during Question Time
Topical questions: A topical question asked by a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly during Question Time
Urgent oral questions: An urgent oral question tabled by a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly
Motions and amendments: A motion or amendment tabled for debate in the Northern Ireland Assembly
Other tabled business: Business tabled by a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly (an adjournment debate topic, Matter of the Day or petition)
Members' statements: A member's statement made in the Northern Ireland Assembly Chamber
Debate contributions: A contribution made by a member during proceedings in the Northern Ireland Assembly Chamber

For oral, topical and urgent questions the questioner’s own follow-up remarks in the Chamber are added as same_member_follow_up_in_chamber.

Yes/no criteria

Each returns the probability (0 to 1) that the answer is yes.

Identity framing

The activity frames a political matter primarily through competing communal, national, religious or cultural identities.

Question: Does `text` frame the issue it raises primarily in terms of competing communal, national, religious or cultural identities (for example unionist versus nationalist, British versus Irish, Protestant versus Catholic, or local people versus migrants), rather than in terms of practical effects on people, services, rights, law or public money?
Yes means: The main thrust of the text is which identity, community or culture is winning, losing, favoured, threatened or insulted.
No means: Identity groups may be mentioned, but the main thrust is a practical policy, service, rights, legal or spending question; or the text has nothing to do with identity.

Sectarian or communal antagonism

The activity promotes hostility, distrust or suspicion between communities.

Question: Does `text` itself promote hostility, distrust or suspicion towards a community, or towards a religious, national or ethnic group, or that group's culture, institutions or members as a whole?
Yes means: The text portrays a group or its culture as threatening, disloyal, illegitimate, inferior or undeserving, or invites resentment against it.
No means: There is no such portrayal; or hostility is only reported, quoted in order to criticise it, or condemned.

Cultural grievance politics

The activity mobilises perceived cultural grievances, symbolic disputes or community resentment.

Question: Is the central point of `text` a perceived cultural grievance or symbolic dispute — for example one community's flags, emblems, parades, bonfires, commemorations, language, sport, place names or culture being disrespected, discriminated against, erased or given too much prominence?
Yes means: The text's central point is that a community's culture or symbols are being slighted, favoured, erased or offended.
No means: Cultural matters, if present, are raised for practical reasons such as cost, safety, access, legal compliance or service provision; or there are no cultural matters.

Dog-whistle messaging

The activity contains language that plausibly conveys an exclusionary or hostile message indirectly.

Question: Does `text` use coded wording that plausibly signals hostility to, or exclusion of, a community or group without saying so directly?
Yes means: The text uses euphemisms, loaded labels or insinuations that an informed reader in Northern Ireland would read as an indirect attack on a group.
No means: The wording is direct and neutral, or any loaded terms are quoted in order to criticise them.

Controversy escalation

The activity amplifies a cultural controversy beyond its substantive policy or public-interest significance.

Question: Does `text` amplify a cultural or identity controversy beyond its substantive policy or public-interest significance — for example pursuing a minor symbolic incident, seeking to embarrass opponents over a cultural matter, or demanding sanctions over symbolic conduct?
Yes means: The emphasis on the controversy is out of proportion to any practical policy, safety, legal or spending question the text raises.
No means: Any controversy is addressed in proportion to a genuine policy, safety, legal or spending question; or there is no cultural controversy.

Legitimate policy scrutiny

The activity is primarily a substantive attempt to scrutinise policy, expenditure, public services, equality, rights or government decisions.

Question: Is `text` primarily a substantive attempt to scrutinise or shape policy, spending, public services, equality, rights, legislation or government decisions?
Yes means: The text mainly seeks information, accountability, a decision or a change on a matter of policy, spending, services, rights or law.
No means: The text mainly does something else, such as scoring a point, expressing grievance, or making a statement with no substantive request or argument.

Overall judgement

Question: Taking everything into account, is this Assembly activity being used to promote, exploit or escalate a cultural, sectarian, communal or identity-based controversy, rather than to deal with the substance of an issue?
Yes means: The activity's main function is identity-based point-scoring, grievance or division.
No means: Ordinary democratic or policy activity — including activity on culturally sensitive subjects such as the Irish language, Ulster-Scots, the GAA, the Orange Order, flags, religion, immigration or the Troubles — that deals with substance, or that reports, questions or condemns division.

Context and attribution

Is the MLA endorsing the relevant framing, or quoting, questioning, describing or condemning it? Jev chooses one option and gives a probability for each.

Question: What is the relationship between the speaker of `text` and any identity-based or culture-war framing in it? If there is no such framing, choose 'none'.

No identity-based framing (none): There is no identity-based or culture-war framing in the text.
Reports or questions it (reports): The speaker reports, quotes or asks factual questions about the framing or controversy without adopting it.
Criticises or condemns it (condemns): The speaker criticises, rejects or condemns the framing, the hostility or the divisive behaviour.
Adopts it (adopts): The speaker adopts or advances the framing in their own voice.

“No identity-based framing” is listed first on purpose: if the model leans towards the first option, the lean favours the cautious answer.

Subject area

Question: Which subject area does any identity-related content of `text` mainly concern? If there is none, choose 'none'.

No identity-related subject (none)
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials (flags_symbols)
Parades, bonfires and commemorations (parades_bonfires)
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy (language)
Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies (sport_culture)
Religion, churches and faith-based institutions (religion)
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism (legacy)
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty (constitution)
Immigration, asylum, race and ethnicity (immigration_race)
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues (social_issues)
Education structures, integration and community division (education_division)
Another identity-related subject (other_identity)

The subject area describes what a qualifying activity is about. It does not affect whether a record qualifies.

Thresholds and decision rules

Thresholds applied in code (rubric 2026.10-r1)
Threshold	Value	Used for
Overall, to qualify	≥ 0.80	Qualifying
Strongest culture-war criterion, to qualify	≥ 0.60	Qualifying
Probability the text adopts the framing, to qualify	≥ 0.60	Qualifying (stance must also be “adopts”)
Legitimate scrutiny that sends a qualifying record to review	≥ 0.80	Uncertain
Overall, to be clearly not qualifying	≤ 0.30	Not qualifying
Criterion strength that contradicts a low overall	≥ 0.80	Uncertain
Adopts-framing probability below which a low-overall record is not qualifying	< 0.20	Not qualifying (with overall below 0.50)
A criterion is shown as met	≥ 0.50	Display and filters

Decision rules, in the order they are applied:

qualifying_thresholds_met: All qualifying thresholds were met.
clear_not_qualifying: The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying threshold.
framing_not_adopted: The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
conflict_with_scrutiny: The qualifying thresholds were met, but the activity was also strongly assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny, so it needs a human decision.
contradictory_answers: The overall probability was low but at least one criterion was strongly met; the answers conflict, so it needs a human decision.
below_confidence_thresholds: The answers did not meet either automatic threshold.

Uncertain records are excluded from all totals and percentages until a person reviews them.

Back to the methodology