OHIO
TRAINING DATA

AI-Ready Data / Assessment & verification

AI-ready starts
with proof.

Give buyers a clear reason
to take the next step.

Show how much real work your data can reconstruct—with verified links, consistent identities, and evidence they can inspect. Ohio Training Data connects labs and brokers with operational data for AI training and RL gyms. Our partner Clear Harness helps get that data quality-ranked, so its strengths and gaps are easier to evaluate.

Quality ranking with Clear Harness, our partner. Opens their website.

CONNECTED WORK / PROJECT_042Illustrative

The value is
in the connections.

One shared
90-day
window
EmailThe original request
thread_012
Chat + issueActions & ownership
issue_108
CalendarPeople & coordination
event_026
One projectproject_042Consistent identityemployee_017
Shared filesThe work product
file_064
CommentsDecisions & rationale
comment_031
Version historyWhat changed & why
file_064 · v1 → v2
RequestActionDecisionOutcome
Can these connections survive de-identification?
That is something a quality assessment can test. Example structure, not a customer dataset.
01 / ReconstructSee the complete workflow.

Requests, actions, decisions, and outcomes.

02 / VerifyKnow which links hold up.

Across systems. Before and after de-ID.

03 / DemonstratePut evidence in buyers’ hands.

A quality report and a map to the records.

The question that matters

“Can we follow the work
all the way through?”

A record count describes the size of a dataset. Connected evidence shows what a buyer can reconstruct from it. We help you demonstrate that difference.

The evaluation question our service is built around.

Inside your quality assessment

Six ways to make
quality visible.

Go into the next evaluation with answers. Through our partnership with Clear Harness, explore quality ranking against the requirements that matter to your use case. Agree the scope and methodology for your sample with the assessment provider.

OHIO TRAINING DATA / QUALITY FRAMEWORK

A closer look at the work behind the data.

Illustrative sample reportExample numbers. Not customer results or pass thresholds.
01

Cross-system linkage

86%

Do the records connect?

860 of 1,000 eligible records have at least one validated relationship to another system.

How we measure it
Linked eligible records ÷ all eligible records. We define eligible records and a valid link, separate explicit IDs from inferred matches, and inspect ambiguous matches and disconnected records. We also report connected employees, projects, and issues by system pair.
02

Links retained after de-ID

94%

Do connections survive?

470 of 500 validated, in-scope original links remain usable after de-identification.

How we measure it
Usable post-de-ID links ÷ validated pre-de-ID links in the agreed scope. We compare paired exports and log broken joins, excluded records, and reasons for loss. Without a controlled baseline, retention is marked “not measured.”
03

Identity consistency

98%

Is the same person still the same person?

196 of 200 reviewed cross-application employee mappings retain the correct stable identity.

How we measure it
Correct, consistent pseudonymous mappings ÷ reviewed mappings. We check ID collisions, split identities, shared accounts, and bots against an authorized reference. Without that reference, structural consistency and verified correctness are reported separately.
04

Complete workflow chains

4 / 5

Can you follow the work to its outcome?

Four of five selected workflows include a linked request, actions, decision, and observable result.

How we measure it
Chains meeting the agreed completeness rubric ÷ selected chains. We inspect chronology, supporting communications, files, comments, version history, and outcome evidence. Selection method and gaps are disclosed; a selected sample is not a whole-dataset estimate.
05

Activity density

142emails
386messages
18files

Median per active employee-month, by type

Is there enough context to learn from?

Compare activity by employee, role, system, and month—not just a company-wide total.

How we measure it
Deduplicated activity per active employee-month, with the median and distribution for each record type reported separately. We document activity definitions, partial months, automated messages, shared records, and missing exports so density remains interpretable.
06

Shared time-window coverage

6 / 6

Do the sources cover the same work?

All six requested source types have records in the same 90-day sample window.

How we measure it
Source types represented in the shared window ÷ requested source types: email, calendar, chat, files, comments, and version history. We report date gaps, timestamp and timezone quality, and export coverage separately. Presence does not prove completeness.
EXAMPLE FINDING

Four complete workflows.
One missing its final approval.

WHAT THAT TELLS YOU

Four chains can move to task-design review. The fifth needs its approval record located or its limitation disclosed.

YOUR NEXT MOVE

Resolve the evidence gap before presenting that workflow as complete.

Every result is tied to a sample, dataset version, and agreed criteria. A selected sample does not establish whole-dataset quality or model performance.

See what your sample reveals

Your data. Your next move.

Confidence on both
sides of the table.

Bring us a dataset, a buyer’s specification, or a sourcing requirement. Explore the evidence you need with our quality-ranking partner, Clear Harness.

AI labs & data brokers

Find the work
your models need.

Source connected operational data for agent training, evaluation, and reinforcement learning environments—or assess a sample you already have.

  • Know what connects. Inspect links, stable identities, and the context preserved after de-ID.
  • Know what is usable. Review workflows, outcome evidence, and gaps against your intended tasks.
  • Know where to go next. Use a scoped quality review to guide a deeper dataset evaluation.
Discuss a dataset or requirement
Businesses & data owners

Bring proof to
your next deal.

Give brokers and direct buyers something concrete to evaluate. Quality ranking with Clear Harness helps you make a stronger case for the best rates your data can support. Understand your data’s strengths, address its gaps, and explain its usefulness with evidence.

  • Show the quality. Present findings for the assessed dataset version.
  • Make targeted improvements. Prioritize missing links and context that affect reconstructability.
  • Support multiple conversations. Scope a report for sharing under your existing licensing terms.
Get my data quality-ranked

Make your next conversation concrete

A report.
A roadmap.
A reason to
keep talking.

Turn an assessment into useful next steps. Discuss a package with Clear Harness that explains the findings, shows how to connect the records, and makes the work inspectable. The scope below is a framework for that conversation.

Start with a sample evaluation
Documented scope.
Traceable evidence.
Clear limitations.
QUALITY REPORT

Know where you stand.

Measured results, denominators, sample coverage, exceptions, and a prioritized list of fixes. A clear account of what was checked and what remains open.

CONNECTION MANIFEST

Make the dataset navigable.

Source inventory, schemas, stable pseudonymous IDs, join keys, relationship types, timestamps, lineage, and de-ID transformations.

ILLUSTRATIVE JOIN MAPissue_108.project_id → project_042.idcomment_031.file_id → file_064.idJoin rules · supporting evidence · known gaps

Direct and inferred links are distinguished. Re-identification keys stay out of the buyer package.

WORKFLOW EVIDENCE

Show the work, end to end.

Reviewed projects or issues with communications, actions, revisions, decisions, and outcomes. Missing steps are visible, so buyers can assess fitness for their use case.

Your first step

One sample.
A clearer next move.

You don’t need to start with a full export. Inquire about a focused test to see what connects, what is missing, and what deserves a closer look.

A PRACTICAL STARTING SCOPE
3–5connected projects
or issues
2–3months in a shared
time window

Relevant email, calendar, chat, files, comments, and version history—with the relationships preserved.

THE PURPOSEFind out how much useful work
your sample can reconstruct.

Your next step with Clear Harness

What would you like
your data to prove?

Visit Clear Harness to discuss what you have and what you want to use it for. Confirm the evaluation scope, pricing, deliverables, and sample-handling process directly with our partner.

01

Start with a conversation.
A high-level description is enough.

02

Agree the scope and cost.
Before transferring any dataset.

Explore quality ranking with Clear Harness Continue to data.getclearharness.com

You’ll leave Ohio Training Data for our partner’s site. Review the agreed scope and handling process before sharing records. Quality ranking does not guarantee a purchase, licensing price, or model-performance gain.

  1. 01 / Scope

    Define a meaningful test.

    Choose the sample and agree the intended use, buyer requirements, and assessment criteria.

  2. 02 / Assess

    Inspect the connections.

    Review the agreed sample. Paired, authorized exports enable a before-and-after de-ID comparison.

  3. 03 / Act

    Put the findings to work.

    Review measured quality, missing context, and fixes. Decide how to improve, present, or evaluate the dataset next.

A few useful answers

Clarity before
you commit.

Questions about your systems or a buyer’s requirements? Let’s talk through them.

What does “verified” mean here?

Documented checks against agreed criteria for a named dataset version and sample. The report distinguishes measured results, reviewed evidence, assumptions, and untested areas. It is not a blanket certification of a whole dataset or a guarantee of buyer acceptance.

Does a connected dataset become an RL gym automatically?

No. Connected records can support task reconstruction, but an RL environment also needs task definitions, allowed actions, environment behavior, and outcome or reward checks. A quality review assesses source evidence and gaps relevant to that intended use; model performance requires a separate evaluation.

Can we use the report with multiple brokers or direct buyers?

Discuss an assessment for those conversations with Clear Harness and agree which findings and examples may be shared. Existing exclusivity, confidentiality, licensing rights, and buyer requirements still apply. A report describes the assessed version and needs revisiting when that data changes.

Is this the same as the business licensing assessment?

Clear Harness is our partner for quality ranking of business data. That is distinct from exploring the commercial licensing opportunity. The Troveo business assessment is a separate starting point for exploring a licensing opportunity. We may receive compensation for qualifying Troveo referrals; see our disclosures.

Does preserving links prove the data is anonymous?

No. Linkage quality and privacy are separate checks. Consistent pseudonymous identities help connect work, but they do not establish anonymity or permission to share records. Privacy, rights, permitted uses, and sample handling must be addressed within the agreed scope.

Quality ranking with Clear Harness.Get quality-ranked