Weak signal
- One approach was tried; if it worked, ship it.
What this question asks
Part 4 of 4 - Process of Experimentation.
Process of experimentation requires alternatives. One option tried and shipped does not pass Part 4. The binder looks for ADRs, design docs, abandoned branches, or prototype repositories that show alternatives evaluated.
Why it is on the rubric
Statute: 26 U.S.C. § 41(d)(1)(C); Treas. Reg. § 1.41-4(a)(5) and § 1.41-4(a)(6).
This question implements Process of Experimentation from 26 U.S.C. § 41(d)(1)(C); Treas. Reg. § 1.41-4(a)(5) and § 1.41-4(a)(6). The binder scores every claimed business component against this question and pairs the answer with cited evidence from your repositories.
Evidence the binder accepts
These are the artifact types the binder ingests to answer this question for a given business component.
- Design documents (internal)
- Architectural decision records (ADRs)
- Prototype branches that were explored
- Abandoned branches that show alternatives evaluated
What weak vs strong evidence looks like
Weak evidence does not disqualify the component on its own; the binder will flag the gap and ask for a stronger artifact if one exists.
Strong signal
- Two or more alternatives evaluated with documented criteria.
Other rubric questions under Process of Experimentation
All questions under Part 4 (Process of Experimentation) score the same business component:
Get documentation built to survive an exam
R&D Binder answers all 11 rubric questions for every claimed business component, with PR-number evidence and an audit-defense flag review.