INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Cacao manufacturing data for AI roast-to-grind lineage
Cacao production offers a lineage problem across incoming beans, roasting batches and later chocolate lots.
NAICS 311351 · Chocolate and Confectionery Manufacturing from Cacao Beans
Cacao production offers a lineage problem across incoming beans, roasting batches and later chocolate lots. FDA lists standards for cacao products, providing public context for the product category. The proposed AI exercise focuses on record relationships and deliberately avoids inferring composition from appearance. FDA food standards of identity
Write an original receiving record for two fictional bean origins, split one into two roast runs and combine one output with a carryover grinding lot. Ask the model which source beans are supported for each final lot. Add a packaging proof that names only the most recent receipt. The reviewer key should retain every documented ancestor and identify the unsupported origin claim.
Keep the roast event, grind event, quantity basis and source identifiers in separate fields. Evaluate with different origins and a new branching diagram. A response that lists the right country but misses a second contributing lot should fail the lineage check. Include a complete single-source case to ensure the model can also recognize a supported straightforward relationship.
Use invented sourcing and batch data. Real origin contracts, farmer information, roast profiles and commissioned packaging can carry different restrictions. Describe the dataset's evidence limits and expert review, then seek a buyer-approved task specification. That agreement determines whether a historical record package or newly captured workflow would be commercially relevant.
Discuss this original manufacturing sample with Fiund
Original Fiund exercise
A recent receiving lot cannot replace all documented ancestors of a blended output
An original fictional lot graph uses abstract origins and batch names. There is no cacao, formula, roast setting, supplier contract or actual origin claim.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| CLG1 | Receiving and split | Origin alias O1 lot B1 splits into mock roast outputs R1 and R2. Distinct O2 lot B2 is the documented source of earlier ground lot G0. |
| CLG2 | Actual lineage | Finished lot F1 uses R1 plus G0 under an exact original merge record. F2 uses R2 only. Neither record supplies proportional contribution. |
| CLG3 | Packaging proof | Draft for F1 names only O1 because B1 is most recent. No approved rule for discarding a documented ancestor. |
Question for the model
Which origins are supported for F1 and F2, and what information does the graph not establish?
Show the reference answer and checks
CLG1 and CLG2 trace F1 through R1 to B1/O1 and through G0 to B2/O2. F2 traces only through R2 to B1/O1 in the supplied graph. CLG3 omits a documented F1 ancestor and cannot override the actual merge. Neither lineage proves relative percentages because quantities are absent. Preserve every supported ancestor and leave composition proportions unresolved rather than treat the most recent receipt as the only source.
- Dropping a carryover ancestor when following a split and merge.
- Inferring source percentages from the number or recency of ancestor records.
Fields to preserve
- Receiving lot and fictional origin
- Defines ancestry.
- Split, merge and output links
- Supports graph traversal.
- Quantity basis and proof discrepancy
- Limits composition claims.
Test another case
Reverse the receiving order and use a single-source F3 without a merge. Require the source set to follow the graph rather than assume every final lot has two origins.
Use original fictitious data. Exclude real sourcing and production settings; qualified staff retain actual label and product decisions.
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.