---
title: "Comment by BomToBe on \"Who Evaluates the Evaluator? Testing AI Simulators in Production\" | Hashnode"
description: "One useful validation is to check the judge metrics against blinded human ratings on a held-out set, and report agreement by failure type. A discriminator can s"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/who-evaluates-the-evaluator-testing-ai-simulators-in-production/6ad4da90529ef7522795cef0/comment/6ad4e0da9ee133b5f8149c3f"
---

[Discussion](https://hashnode.com/posts/who-evaluates-the-evaluator-testing-ai-simulators-in-production/6ad4da90529ef7522795cef0)

Comment [Who Evaluates the Evaluator? Testing AI Simulators in Production](https://hashnode.com/posts/who-evaluates-the-evaluator-testing-ai-simulators-in-production/6ad4da90529ef7522795cef0)

[Oct 18](https://hashnode.com/posts/who-evaluates-the-evaluator-testing-ai-simulators-in-production/6ad4da90529ef7522795cef0/comment/6ad4e0da9ee133b5f8149c3f)

One useful validation is to check the judge metrics against blinded human ratings on a held-out set, and report agreement by failure type. A discriminator can separate human and synthetic transcripts by stylistic artifacts without proving the simulator followed its scenario; a plausible exchange can still violate the scenario contract. Keeping naturalness and behavioral fidelity as separate scores makes that gap visible. I work at BOMTOBE, the team behind Orke; this is a design suggestion, not a test I have run.