/claim #18

Summary

• add a self-contained scientific bounty sponsor reliability scorecard for solver pre-commitment decisions
• evaluate funding proof, review responsiveness, rubric measurability, timeline readiness, amendment stability, payout history, dispute responsiveness, and IP/NDA clarity
• emit trusted/watch/hold tiers, sponsor improvement actions, solver guidance, public-safe audit digests, sample data, tests, requirement mapping, SVG/GIF demo artifacts, and a short MP4 demo video

Distinctness

This slice sits before solver onboarding and answers whether a sponsor/challenge is reliable enough for researchers to invest time. It does not duplicate existing intake, scoring/arbitration, appeals, workspace privacy, anti-collusion, escrow settlement, reproducibility-audit, or amendment-control modules.

References reviewed

• GSA Prize and Challenge Toolkit guidance on measurable evaluation criteria, judging protocols, conflicts, and NDA handling
• GSA prize competitions overview for the announce/submit/review/award flow
• Nesta Challenge Prizes practice guide for prize construction, incentives, and participant trust

Demo

• scientific-bounty-sponsor-scorecard/docs/demo.mp4
• scientific-bounty-sponsor-scorecard/docs/demo.gif
• scientific-bounty-sponsor-scorecard/docs/demo.svg
• cd scientific-bounty-sponsor-scorecard && npm run demo

Validation

• npm run check
• npm test
• npm run demo
• git diff --check
• verified docs/demo.mp4 is ISO Media MP4
• verified docs/demo.gif renders as 960x540 GIF

AI-assisted with OpenAI Codex; I reviewed and locally verified the diff before submitting.