Weak signal
- No time tracking; estimate by gut.
What this question asks
Part 4 of 4 - Process of Experimentation.
Treas. Reg. 1.41-4(a)(6) requires at least 80 percent of the activity to be experimentation. This question forces the binder to either measure the percentage from time-tracking or commit categorization, or re-scope the component until the threshold is met.
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.
- Time-tracking exports per engineer or per component
- Payroll register linked to engineering time
- Categorized commit log (experimentation vs admin vs deployment)
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
- Categorized commit log or time tracking shows substantially-all threshold met.
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.