INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Pet service station workflows for AI task evaluation
A grooming or boarding team can demonstrate setup and cleanup with mock equipment.
NAICS 812910 · Pet Care (except Veterinary) Services
A grooming or boarding team can demonstrate setup and cleanup with mock equipment. A recorded workflow can help evaluate tool recognition or whether an assistant identifies a missing preparation step. Figure’s general human-task collection establishes an adjacent use for everyday activity data. It does not establish a program for a particular pet facility. Figure Index launch
Demonstrate a station reset without a live animal
Use an empty station, clean props and a fabricated service card. Show an employee checking the setup, noticing one misplaced item and marking the station ready after a human review. Label tool position, expected arrangement, the exception and the handoff. Include a second station design to test whether an assistant can recognize readiness without memorizing one layout. A buyer can decide whether it needs object labels or a sequence of actions.
Keep animal and client information out of the sample
Use no live animals in the initial demonstration. Keep owners, animal health information, tags, appointments and client payments out of frame. Obtain employee and site permissions. CDC’s occupational material identifies risks faced by animal care workers, which a facility should manage through its own safety procedures. CDC animal care worker hazards
Describe the station, tools, and the human check for readiness. Describe collection capabilities
Original Fiund exercise
Correcting one misplaced prop does not itself record the human readiness check
An empty practice grooming station uses clean props and a fabricated service card. No live animal, owner, health information or actual care procedure is involved.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| PTW1 | Original station-A setup card | Brush prop B in zone 1, towel T in zone 2. Human review required before practice ready status. |
| PTW2 | Demonstration sequence | B initially in zone 2, moved visibly to zone 1. Final view shows T in zone 2. Reviewer R then signs station A ready. |
| PTW3 | Station-B control | Different setup card places B in zone 3. Image shows B in zone 1, with no linked reviewer sign-off. |
Question for the model
Which station has the required evidence chain, and should the model mark B ready by copying station A's arrangement?
Show the reference answer and checks
PTW1 and PTW2 support A's observed exception, visible correction, matched final arrangement and separate human sign-off. PTW3 has a different station-B rule and no sign-off, so A's zone-1 arrangement is not evidence of B readiness. Evaluate the supplied setup card and human check for each station rather than memorizing one layout or treating a visible correction as the authorization itself.
- Applying one station's expected layout to a different design.
- Marking ready from corrected object positions without the required human review record.
Fields to preserve
- Station and setup-card version
- Defines the expected arrangement.
- Object position and exception
- Supports the visible sequence.
- Human sign-off link
- Separates observed setup from authorized readiness.
Test another case
Give B a correct zone-3 arrangement but still no review. Require a setup-match finding without a completed readiness authorization.
Use empty stations and clean props with employee/site permission. Exclude animals, owners, health data, tags, appointments and payments.
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.