CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

evaluating-with-leakage-gates

Evaluate an OpenMed de-identification or clinical NER model against the leakage-first release gates G1a through G8, which gate releases on residual PHI leakage rather than on F1. Use when the user wants to run the OpenMed eval harness on a synthetic golden set, decide whether a de-id model is RELEASABLE or QUARANTINED, enforce direct-identifier recall floors, require zero critical leakage, fit calibration thresholds, or produce a signed gate report. Trigger on "release gate", "leakage", "is this model safe to ship", "G1a", "G3", "quarantine", "recall floor", or "calibration thresholds" in an OpenMed de-id context.

74

Quality

91%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Evaluating with Leakage Gates

OpenMed's release gates answer one question: did any PHI leak? A de-id model with a beautiful F1 can still leak a single SSN — and that one leak is a HIPAA breach. So openmed.eval gates on residual leakage and per-label recall floors, not on aggregate F1. The candidate is either RELEASABLE or QUARANTINED; there is no partial credit.

When to use this skill

  • You have a candidate de-id or PII model and need a ship / no-ship decision.
  • You want to run the benchmark harness over a synthetic golden suite.
  • You need to enforce direct-identifier recall floors and critical_leakage == 0.
  • You need calibration thresholds (thresholds.json) before the gate will pass.
  • You want a signed, reproducible gate report for governance.

This is the flagship eval skill. For a pure NER scorecard see benchmarking-clinical-ner; for CI wiring see gating-deid-leakage.

The gates (G1a–G8)

GateChecksFloor / rule
G1aDirect & quasi identifiers (PERSON, EMAIL, PHONE, SSN, ID_NUM, DATE_OF_BIRTH, ...)recall ≥ 0.990 (v1.6) / 0.995 (v2.0); strict-no-leak policies raise the floor
G1bStructured secrets (API_KEY, ACCOUNT_NUMBER, CREDIT_CARD, IBAN)recall ≥ 0.995
G2Free-text names/locations/datesrecall ≥ 0.980 (v1.6) / 0.990 (v2.0)
G3Critical leakage (SSN, CREDIT_CARD, CVV, API_KEY, PIN, IBAN, ...)count must be exactly 0
G4Quantized recall delta vs fp parentwithin INT8 / INT4 limits
G5Latency & RAM vs device tier budgetp50/p95/RAM under tier budget
G6p50/p95 latency documentedmust be present and finite
G7Baseline regressionrecall drop ≤ 0.002/label; leakage ≤ soft ceiling 0.005 and ≤ steward target; no leakage regression vs last-green
G8Span integritypredicted spans validate (no overlaps/out-of-range)

Constants live in openmed.eval.release_gates (G1A_V16_RECALL_FLOOR, G1B_RECALL_FLOOR, G7_RECALL_DROP_LIMIT, RESIDUAL_LEAKAGE_SOFT_CEILING, ...). Confirm them there rather than hardcoding — they move per milestone.

Quick start

Run a candidate benchmark over a synthetic golden suite, then gate it:

from openmed.eval import run_suite, ReleaseGate, RELEASABLE

# 1) Produce a candidate BenchmarkReport from a SYNTHETIC fixtures file.
#    Each fixture carries gold PHI spans; no real patient text is committed.
report = run_suite(
    "eval/golden/phi_synthetic.json",     # user-supplied synthetic fixtures
    suite="golden",
    model_name="OpenMed/Privacy-PII-Detection",
    device="cpu",
    metadata={
        "family": "PII",
        "tier": "base",
        "policy": "hipaa_safe_harbor",
        # calibration artifacts are required for mask/replace policies (see below)
        "thresholds_path": "eval/artifacts/thresholds.json",
        "calibration_report_path": "eval/artifacts/calibration_report.json",
    },
)

# 2) Gate it. The gate reads the last-green baseline store read-only and
#    returns a signed GateReport.
gate = ReleaseGate(milestone="v1.6", policy="hipaa_safe_harbor")
decision = gate.evaluate(report)

print(decision.decision)                  # "RELEASABLE" or "QUARANTINED"
for check in decision.gate_results:
    if not check.passed:
        print(check.gate, "->", check.reason, check.details)

assert decision.decision == RELEASABLE, "do not ship a quarantined model"

CLI equivalent (fails closed, exit code 1 on quarantine):

python -m openmed.eval.release_gates \
  --candidate eval/out/candidate_report.json \
  --milestone v1.6 --policy hipaa_safe_harbor \
  --output release-gate-report.json

Workflow

  1. Build a synthetic golden suite. Fixtures are JSON with text and gold_spans (offsets + labels). Use building-gold-corpus to scaffold one. Committed gold must be synthetic; DUA corpora (i2b2/n2c2) are eval-only and never committed.

  2. Fit calibration thresholds for any policy that masks or replaces:

    from openmed.eval import write_calibration_artifacts
    
    paths = write_calibration_artifacts(
        calibration_samples,                 # held-out score/target samples
        artifact_dir="eval/artifacts",
        model_id="OpenMed/Privacy-PII-Detection",
        suite="golden",
        target_leakage=0.0,                   # leakage-first: drive leakage to 0
    )
    # writes thresholds.json + calibration_report.json the gate looks for

    The gate's calibration_present check fails the build if these are missing for a mask/replace policy.

  3. Run the suite (run_suite / run_benchmark) to get a BenchmarkReport.

  4. Evaluate with ReleaseGate(...).evaluate(report).

  5. Read the per-gate results. Each GateCheck carries gate, passed, reason, and details (e.g. which labels fell below the recall floor).

  6. Fail closed. Treat anything other than RELEASABLE as a hard stop.

  7. Audit subgroups with fairness_report (see auditing-subgroup-fairness) so an aggregate pass doesn't hide an under-protected group.

Hand-off to / from OpenMed

  • From building-with-openmed and the de-id pipeline: you evaluate the model produced by openmed.deidentify / openmed.extract_pii.
  • To gating-deid-leakage: wrap ReleaseGate.evaluate(...) in a pytest/CLI gate so CI fails closed on regression.
  • To authoring-model-cards: feed GateReport, fairness_report, and error_report outputs into the model card's metrics and limitations sections.
  • Pairs with auditing-subgroup-fairness (fairness_report) and benchmarking-clinical-ner (error_report).

Edge cases & gotchas

  • F1 is not a gate. A model can have higher F1 and still be quarantined if it leaks one critical identifier (G3) or drops a label below its floor (G1a/G1b).
  • Calibration is mandatory for mask/replace policies. No thresholds.jsoncalibration_present fails → QUARANTINED.
  • Baselines are read, never written, by the gate. The gate compares against the last-green baseline store without mutating it (G7). Promote baselines in a separate, deliberate step.
  • Strict-no-leak policies raise the G1a floor and force the leakage target to 0. Don't assume the default floor.
  • Reports must carry identity metadata (family, tier, format, eval_set_hash, leakage_fixture_hash); manifest_coherence fails without it.
  • Reports are signed (HMAC-SHA256). Set OPENMED_RELEASE_GATE_KEY for a real signing key; GateReport.verify(key) checks the repro hash and signature.
  • No raw PHI in the report. Gate evidence is offsets, hashes, and labels — never plaintext identifiers. Keep it that way in any wrapper you write.

Standards & references

  • HIPAA Safe Harbor / Expert Determination (45 CFR 164.514): https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/special-topics/de-identification/
  • NIST SP 800-188, De-Identification of Personal Information: https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/188/final
  • i2b2 2014 de-identification shared task (recall-first evaluation tradition): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2015.06.007
  • OpenMed eval source of truth: openmed/eval/release_gates.py, openmed/eval/harness.py, openmed/eval/calibrate.py.
Repository
maziyarpanahi/openmed
Last updated
First committed

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.