INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Building duct cleaning scope and inspection image data for AI
An inspection photo can document one section of a duct while a service ticket covers several.
NAICS 561790 · Other Services to Buildings and Dwellings
An inspection photo can document one section of a duct while a service ticket covers several. EPA’s duct cleaning guidance includes a consumer checklist. A contractor can use an offline prop to show how a model should compare the ticket with the evidence for each section. EPA air duct cleaning guidance
Build a tabletop mockup with two labeled sections. Pair a service scope with dated photos for just one and an unclear closeout note that says the full run was checked. Ask the model to cite the covered section and describe the missing evidence. Include a repeated photo from the wrong section as a control.
Use original media and a mock structure. Exclude customer interiors, actual duct layouts, access details and service claims based on the exercise. Review property permission before recording any real example.
Describe a mock duct service evidence sample
Original Fiund exercise
A photo of one duct section cannot close a two-section service scope
A tabletop mock duct has two original labels and staged image annotations. It contains no customer interior, actual air system, property access detail or service-effectiveness claim.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| DU1 | Scope S | Mock sections A and B both listed for inspection. Original section map supplied. |
| DU2 | Photo packet | Dated before-after annotations explicitly identify A and show its reviewed visible change. A copied image filed under B retains visible section-A label. |
| DU3 | Closeout note | Unsigned note says 'full run checked' without section references or B-specific image. No separate completed B inspection record. |
Question for the model
Which section has matching visual evidence, and does the full-run note or duplicated photo establish B's inspection?
Show the reference answer and checks
DU2 supports A's matched dated views and reviewed visible change. The image filed under B still identifies A, so it supplies no B-specific observation. DU3's unsigned, unreferenced full-run note does not resolve that source gap. Report A's evidence and request the missing B inspection record rather than extend one section's documentation across DU1's entire scope or infer air-quality or cleaning-effectiveness outcomes.
- Accepting a repeated photo under another section without checking its visible identity.
- Treating a vague closeout note as evidence for every scoped section.
Fields to preserve
- Scope and mock section ID
- Defines the coverage.
- Photo date and visible section label
- Supports the comparison.
- Closeout signature and missing evidence
- Limits completion claims.
Test another case
Add a correctly labeled B photo without a date or prior view. Require identity to resolve while timing and before-after comparison remain unsupported.
Use owned mock structures and original media. Exclude actual layouts and interiors; property permission is required for any separate real example.
Discuss a contribution
Describe the sources you control, the task they could support and what has already been checked. Use the existing-data assessment for an archive or the collection brief for a new recording project. The contributor agreement defines Fiund’s licensing authority and compensation. A guide or fictional exercise does not establish an accepted collection or a sale.