Enum: ModelDivergenceMaterialityEnum

Whether a specific divergence bears on the specific claim its link makes. This is what separates a caveat that undermines the claim from one that is real but beside the point, and it is deliberately per-divergence where fidelity is per-link. Recording it is what could eventually let fidelity be derived rather than authored. The per-divergence framing mirrors the risk-informed grading in ASME V&V 40 and the FDA credibility guidance, where how much credibility evidence a model needs is set by its influence on the decision and the consequence of that decision being wrong, rather than by a single global quality score.

URI: dismech:enum/ModelDivergenceMaterialityEnum

Permissible Values

Value	Meaning	Description	Additional Info
INVALIDATING	None	The claim should not be transferred to human disease on this model alone	Title: Invalidating
QUALIFYING	None	The claim holds, but in a narrower form than the link's description would s...	Title: Qualifying
IMMATERIAL	None	A real divergence that does not bear on this particular claim	Title: Immaterial
UNKNOWN	None	Bearing on the claim has not been assessed	Title: Unknown

Slots

Name	Description
materiality	Whether this specific divergence bears on the specific claim the link makes

See Also

• https://www.asme.org/codes-standards/find-codes-standards/assessing-credibility-of-computational-modeling-through-verification-and-validation-application-to-medical-devices
• https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/assessing-credibility-computational-modeling-and-simulation-medical-device-submissions

Identifier and Mapping Information

Schema Source

• from schema: https://w3id.org/monarch-initiative/dismech

LinkML Source

name: ModelDivergenceMaterialityEnum
description: Whether a specific divergence bears on the specific claim its link makes.
  This is what separates a caveat that undermines the claim from one that is real
  but beside the point, and it is deliberately per-divergence where `fidelity` is
  per-link. Recording it is what could eventually let `fidelity` be derived rather
  than authored. The per-divergence framing mirrors the risk-informed grading in ASME
  V&V 40 and the FDA credibility guidance, where how much credibility evidence a model
  needs is set by its influence on the decision and the consequence of that decision
  being wrong, rather than by a single global quality score.
from_schema: https://w3id.org/monarch-initiative/dismech
see_also:
- https://www.asme.org/codes-standards/find-codes-standards/assessing-credibility-of-computational-modeling-through-verification-and-validation-application-to-medical-devices
- https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/assessing-credibility-computational-modeling-and-simulation-medical-device-submissions
rank: 1000
permissible_values:
  INVALIDATING:
    text: INVALIDATING
    description: The claim should not be transferred to human disease on this model
      alone. Usually pairs with PARTIALLY_RECAPITULATE or FAILS_TO_RECAPITULATE and
      a low fidelity tier.
    title: Invalidating
  QUALIFYING:
    text: QUALIFYING
    description: The claim holds, but in a narrower form than the link's `description`
      would suggest on its own. The commonest value.
    title: Qualifying
  IMMATERIAL:
    text: IMMATERIAL
    description: A real divergence that does not bear on this particular claim. Worth
      recording precisely because it stops a reader inferring that a known limitation
      of the model undermines this use of it.
    title: Immaterial
  UNKNOWN:
    text: UNKNOWN
    description: Bearing on the claim has not been assessed. Prefer this over guessing.
    title: Unknown