A common flaw in algorithmic evaluation is conflating the magnitude of a metric with the certainty of the data supporting it. MeritSKU treats Score and Confidence as strictly orthogonal dimensions: an evaluation can have a high score with low confidence, or a low score with 100% cryptographic certainty.
1. Orthogonality: Score vs Confidence
If a supplier quotes a remarkably low factory price of $1.50 for a complex gadget, the preliminary MeritScore might look exceptional (92/100). However, if this price is an unverified verbal claim without a formal pro-forma invoice or dimensional packing slip, the Confidence is low (35%).
Presenting the score as 92 without orthogonal confidence would mislead operators into buying unverified inventory.
2. Binding Ceiling Caps by Missing Data
To protect operators from unverified optimism, MeritSKU applies binding ceiling caps on the actionable score when Tier 1 evidence is absent:
| Missing Evidence Component | Maximum Confidence Cap | Actionable Status Restriction |
|---|---|---|
| Verified Factory Invoice (Tier 1) | 50% Max Confidence | Cannot exceed CAUTION verdict |
| Dimensional Packaging & Weight | 60% Max Confidence | Freight cost flagged as provisional |
| Customs Tariff Code (HTS) | 70% Max Confidence | Duty reserve computed at max rate (25%) |
| Complete Evidence Present | 100% Confidence Cap | Full ADVANCE verdict permitted |
3. 30/60/90-Day Evidence Half-Life Decay
Supplier quotations, shipping freight spot rates, and ad CPMs degrade over time. MeritSKU applies exponential half-life decay to evidence confidence:
export function calculateDecayedConfidence(
initialConfidence: number,
ageInDays: number,
halfLifeDays: number = 60
): number {
const decayFactor = Math.pow(0.5, ageInDays / halfLifeDays);
return Math.round(initialConfidence * decayFactor);
}Was this guide helpful?
Your feedback trains our editorial documentation standards.