INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Real estate appraisal comparable-source data for AI
An apparent comparable sale may have one attribute from a public record and a different one from another source.
NAICS 531320 · Offices of Real Estate Appraisers
An apparent comparable sale may have one attribute from a public record and a different one from another source. The Uniform Appraisal Dataset materials describe standardized appraisal fields. An appraiser can use fictional comparables to test whether a model retrieves the correct source and acknowledges conflicting information. Freddie Mac Uniform Appraisal Dataset
Create two fictional sales, a mock property record, and an observation with an explicit date. Revise one fact for only one comparable. Ask the assistant which source supports each attribute and what information needs human reconciliation. Make one conflict intentional. The grade should depend on citing evidence and recognizing limits, with valuation and lending decisions outside the task.
Do not share borrower files, actual appraisal reports, location details, licensed listing feed data, or photos without separate permissions. Use invented property descriptions.
Describe a comparable-source benchmark
Original Fiund exercise
A comparable's corrected attribute must retain its source and date
Two fictional sales and invented property descriptions form an evidence-retrieval task. The exercise makes no property valuation, lending or housing eligibility decision.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| AC1 | Mock public-style record | Sale A: area 100 practice units, source dated day 1. Sale B: area 110, dated day 1. |
| AC2 | Authorized observation correction | Sale A area corrected to 105 under source S2 on day 5. No correction applies to B. |
| AC3 | Conflicting source S3 | Sale A area 103 on day 6; no authority or supersession rule resolves S2 versus S3. |
Question for the model
Which sources support each area figure, and can the newest timestamp alone establish a single authoritative Sale A value?
Show the reference answer and checks
AC2 explicitly corrects AC1's Sale A figure from 100 to 105 under S2. AC3 supplies a later conflicting value of 103 but no rule establishing priority over S2. Report the conflict with both sources and dates rather than choosing by timestamp alone. Sale B remains 110 under AC1, unaffected by A's corrections. No valuation can be derived from this source-reconciliation exercise.
- Applying Sale A's corrected area to Sale B.
- Declaring the newest source authoritative without a stated priority or verification basis.
Fields to preserve
- Comparable identity and attribute
- Keeps corrections specific to a property-like record and field.
- Source, date and authority
- Makes competing evidence inspectable.
- Explicit supersession versus conflict
- Distinguishes an accepted correction from an unresolved alternative.
Test another case
Add an authorized reconciliation selecting S3 for A but no sale-price evidence. The model should resolve the attribute while still withholding a value estimate.
Use fabricated descriptions and sales. Exclude real appraisals, borrowers, locations, listing feeds and property photographs.
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.