ms-ai-architect/skills/ms-ai-governance/references/responsible-ai/continuous-improvement-feedback-loops.md
Kjell Tore Guttormsen ddce43d8b2 feat(ms-ai-architect): Spor 1 — Port-1-substrat migrert på 4 ikke-advisor-skills (243 Source + 327 Type + 325 TOC + stale-verified poison fjernet) [skip-docs]
Steg 9 (R4): unified migrate-corpus.mjs --write over engineering/governance/
infrastructure/security. 327 filer mutert, verified=null, prosa byte-identisk
(fra første ## seksjon), advisor urørt (0 endringer).

To applier-fixes oppdaget under kjøring (TDD, RED→GREEN):
- insertHeaderFields: anker faller nå tilbake når en meta-linje selv passerer
  500B (2 filer pakket et avsnitt i **Status:** → Type/Source landet utenfor
  scan-vinduet, applierens post-write-assertion fanget + restaurerte).
- normalizeStaleVerified: fjerner nå ALLE stale non-date **Verified:** i
  500B-vinduet, inkl. stray body-dup rett under --- (9 mlops-genaiops-filer var
  ellers falskt "verified"/fresh, droppet fra worklist). Operatør-godkjent
  utvidelse av carve-out; kun stray metadata-linjer, aldri prosa.

test-transform-criterion: precondition oppdatert til post-migrasjons-sannhet
(fila bærer nå Source). Suite 728/728 grønn.
2026-07-04 10:19:11 +02:00

602 lines
29 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

# Continuous Improvement and Feedback Loops - Iterative Governance
**Last updated:** 2026-06-19
**Status:** GA
**Category:** Responsible AI & Governance
**Type:** reference
**Source:** https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/machine-learning/concept-responsible-ai-dashboard
---
## Innhold
- [Introduksjon](#introduksjon)
- [Kjernekomponenter](#kjernekomponenter)
- [Arkitekturmønstre](#arkitekturmønstre)
- [Beslutningsveiledning](#beslutningsveiledning)
- [Integrasjon med Microsoft-stakken](#integrasjon-med-microsoft-stakken)
- [Offentlig sektor (Norge)](#offentlig-sektor-norge)
- [Kostnad og lisensiering](#kostnad-og-lisensiering)
- [For arkitekten (Cosmo)](#for-arkitekten-cosmo)
- [Kilder og verifisering](#kilder-og-verifisering)
## Introduksjon
Continuous improvement through feedback loops er et kjernekonsept i moderne AI-governance. Dette handler om systematisk innsamling, analyse og anvendelse av tilbakemeldinger fra produksjonssystemer, brukere og domeneksperter for å forbedre AI-kvalitet, sikkerhet og alignment over tid.
**Hvorfor dette er kritisk:**
- AI-modeller degraderer over tid (model drift) grunnet endringer i data og brukeradferd
- Feedback fra reell bruk identifiserer problemer som ikke fanges i testing
- Iterative forbedringer basert på produksjonsdata bygger mer pålitelige AI-systemer
- Compliance og etiske standarder utvikler seg og krever kontinuerlig tilpasning
**Microsofts tilnærming:**
Microsoft implementerer feedback loops gjennom hele AI-livssyklusen fra utvikling med evaluation datasets til produksjonsmonitoring med automated scorers og human review. Målet er å skape en lukket syklus der hver interaksjon bidrar til systemforbedring.
**Kjerneprinsipp:**
> "Every production interaction becomes an opportunity to improve" Microsoft MLflow Documentation
---
## Kjernekomponenter
### 1. Production Data Collection
**Tracing og logging:**
- **MLflow Traces** / **MLflow 3 GenAI**: Fanger detaljerte execution traces med inputs, outputs og alle mellomsteg for hver interaksjon. *(Verified MCP 2026-04)*
- MLflow 3 GenAI introduserer ny **Assessment-datamodell** med to typer:
- **Feedback** assessments: evaluerer faktisk output (ratings, kommentarer — "Var agentens svar bra?")
- **Expectation** assessments: definerer ønsket/korrekt output (ground truth — "Hva burde ha blitt produsert"); brukes til å bygge evalueringsdata
- Tre innsamlingskilder: utvikler (dev), domeneekspert (via Review App), sluttbruker (produksjon)
- `mlflow.log_feedback()` API for å knytte bruker-rating og kommentarer til spesifikke traces
- Ny kapabilitet: **Genie Code** for naturspråk-analyse av trace-data
- Integrert tracing for Databricks agentic applikasjoner
- **Azure Monitor & Application Insights**: Logger operational metrics, latency, error rates
- **Model Data Collector**: Automatisk innsamling av production data for ML-modeller
- **Azure AI Content Safety logs**: Sporer content moderation events
**Hva samles inn:**
- User prompts og model completions
- Confidence scores og metadata
- Latency og performance metrics
- Error logs og exception traces
- User feedback (thumbs up/down, ratings)
**Confidence:** Verified [MLflow Tracing](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/tracing/), [Azure Monitor](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry/concepts/observability)
### 2. Automated Quality Monitoring
**LLM-judge based scorers:**
Microsoft bruker automated scorers (LLM judges) for kontinuerlig kvalitetsvurdering av produksjonstrafikk:
| Scorer Type | Hva den måler | Threshold Eksempel |
|-------------|---------------|-------------------|
| **Groundedness** | Faktisk forankring i kildedokumenter | Pass rate ≥ 70% |
| **Relevance** | Relevans til brukers spørsmål | Pass rate ≥ 70% |
| **Coherence** | Logisk sammenheng i svar | Pass rate ≥ 70% |
| **Fluency** | Språklig flyt og naturlighet | Pass rate ≥ 70% |
| **Safety** | Deteksjon av harmful content | Pass rate ≥ 95% |
**Continuous evaluation:**
- Schedulert evaluering (f.eks. daglig via CronTrigger)
- Real-time scoring av sampled production traffic
- Automated alerts ved threshold violations
- Integration med Microsoft Foundry evaluation tools
**Confidence:** Verified [Generation Quality Monitoring](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry-classic/how-to/monitor-quality-safety?view=foundry-classic)
### 3. Human Feedback Integration
**Tre typer feedback:**
**a) End-user feedback:**
- Explicit feedback: Thumbs up/down, ratings, rapporterte feil
- Implicit signals: Follow-up spørsmål, avbrutte samtaler, session abandonment
- Feedback attachet til MLflow traces for traceability
**b) Domain expert review:**
- Manuell labeling av problematic traces via Review App
- Kvalitetsvurdering mot business-specific criteria
- Alignment av automated scorers med human judgment
**c) Human-in-the-loop (HITL):**
- Approval mechanisms for high-impact decisions
- Reviewer training på AI behavior og vulnerabilities
- Secure review interfaces med Azure Logic Apps / Power Automate
**Confidence:** Verified [Human Feedback](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/human-feedback/), [HITL Security](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/security/benchmark/azure/mcsb-v2-artificial-intelligence-security#ai-5-ensure-human-in-the-loop)
### 4. Evaluation Datasets
**Curated eval datasets:**
Feedback loops bygger evaluation datasets fra produksjonsdata:
- **Problematic traces**: Low-scoring eller user-reported issues
- **High-quality traces**: Validated positive examples (preservere det gode)
- **Edge cases**: Sjeldne scenarios som avdekkes i prod
- **Regression test sets**: Sikre at nye versjoner ikke forverrer ytelse
**Golden datasets:**
Benchmark datasets med kjent kvalitet for consistent testing og model validation.
**Confidence:** Verified [Evaluation Datasets](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/eval-monitor/concepts/eval-datasets)
### 5. Model Retraining & Versioning
**Retraining triggers:**
- Performance degradation under defined KPIs
- Scheduled retraining (high-risk workloads: månedlig; low-risk: kvartalsvis)
- Significant data distribution changes
- New compliance requirements
**Versioning best practices:**
- Track code, parameters, evaluation metrics per version
- MLflow version management for reproducibility
- Rollback mechanisms for underperforming models
- A/B testing av nye versjoner mot baseline
**Confidence:** Verified [Model Management](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/scenarios/ai/manage#manage-ai-models)
---
## Arkitekturmønstre
### Mønster 1: MLflow Continuous Improvement Cycle (Microsoft-anbefalt)
**10-stegs syklus for GenAI apps:**
1. **🚀 Production App** Deployed app genererer MLflow traces
2. **👍 👎 User Feedback** End users gir feedback attachet til traces
3. **🔍 Monitor & Score** Automated LLM judges scorer traces kontinuerlig
4. **⚠️ Identify Issues** Trace UI avdekker mønstre i low-scoring traces
5. **👥 Domain Expert Review** Optional: Eksperter labeler problematic traces
6. **📋 Build Eval Dataset** Kuratér problematic + high-quality traces
7. **🎯 Tune Scorers** Align automated scorers med human judgment
8. **🧪 Evaluate New Versions** Test improved versions mot eval datasets
9. **📈 Compare Results** Sammenlign evaluation runs på tvers av versjoner
10. **✅ Deploy or Iterate** Deploy ved forbedring, ellers iterer videre
**Verktøy:**
- Azure Databricks MLflow 3
- Foundry Agent Service
- MLflow Tracing & Scorers
**Confidence:** Verified [MLflow Continuous Improvement](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/overview/)
### Mønster 2: AI Builder Feedback Loop (Power Platform)
**For custom document processing models:**
1. **Power Automate cloud flow** kjører AI Builder model på production documents
2. **Condition check**: Hvis confidence score < threshold (f.eks. 70%) → add to feedback loop storage
3. **Feedback loop storage**: Microsoft Dataverse table "AI Builder Feedback Loop"
4. **Model improvement**: Data fra feedback loop brukes til retraining
5. **Retrain & redeploy**: Oppdatert model promoteres til production
**Use case:**
Ideal for document understanding scenarios der low-confidence predictions indikerer behov for mer training data.
**Confidence:** Verified [AI Builder Feedback Loop](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ai-builder/feedback-loop)
### Mønster 3: Platform Engineering Feedback Loop
**For infrastruktur og platform-tjenester:**
1. **Developer feedback**: Samle inn pain points (deployment times, tool integration issues)
2. **Post-Incident Reviews (PIRs)**: Root cause analysis etter incidents
3. **Prioritize improvements**: Agile sprints for iterative enhancements
4. **Implement changes**: Optimize CI/CD pipelines, integrate developer-friendly tools
5. **Monitor impact**: Track developer productivity metrics
6. **Regular platform reviews**: Data-driven assessment av platform health
**Observability-Driven Development (ODD):**
Alle nye services instrumenteres for monitoring/logging fra dag 1, slik at feedback er tilgjengelig umiddelbart.
**Confidence:** Verified [Observability & Continuous Improvement](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/training/modules/observability-continuous-improvement/6-continuous-improvement-through-feedback-loops)
---
## Beslutningsveiledning
### Når bruke hvilke feedback mechanisms?
| Scenario | Anbefalt Approach | Rationale |
|----------|-------------------|-----------|
| **Conversational AI** (chatbots, copilots) | MLflow Continuous Improvement Cycle + end-user feedback | Høy interaksjonsfrekvens, stor variasjon i queries, behov for human alignment |
| **Non-conversational agents** (classification, extraction) | Automated scorers + domain expert review for edge cases | Mer strukturerte outputs, lettere å automatisere kvalitetsvurdering |
| **Document processing** (invoice extraction, form recognition) | AI Builder Feedback Loop med confidence thresholds | Tydelig confidence metric, retraining med low-confidence examples gir stor effekt |
| **High-risk decisions** (healthcare, finance, legal) | Mandatory HITL + independent audits + frequent retraining | Regulatoriske krav, høy konsekvens ved feil, behov for human oversight |
| **Platform engineering** | PIRs + developer feedback surveys + observability metrics | Fokus på developer experience og system reliability |
### Retraining frequency guidelines
**Microsoft-anbefaling:**
| Workload Risk Level | Retraining Frequency | Rationale |
|---------------------|----------------------|-----------|
| **High-risk** (healthcare, finance, safety-critical) | Månedlig eller ved performance degradation | Rask tilpasning til data changes, høy konsekvens ved feil |
| **Medium-risk** (customer-facing, business-critical) | Kvartalsvis | Balanse mellom cost og quality maintenance |
| **Low-risk** (internal tools, non-critical) | Årlig eller ved major data shifts | Cost-efficient, akseptabel performance variance |
**Confidence:** Verified [Model Retraining Policies](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/scenarios/ai/govern#document-ai-governance-policies)
### Quality gates for model promotion
**Før en ny modellversjon promoteres til production:**
1.**Evaluation results**: Forbedring på target metrics uten regression
2.**Safety validation**: Passed alle safety scorers (violence, hate, self-harm, etc.)
3.**Regression testing**: Eval dataset performance ≥ baseline
4.**Performance benchmarks**: Latency og cost targets møtt
5.**Compliance check**: Alignment med regulatory requirements
6.**Stakeholder review**: Approval fra governance team for high-risk workloads
**Confidence:** Verified [Model Promotion Processes](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/scenarios/ai/manage#manage-ai-models)
---
## Integrasjon med Microsoft-stakken
### Microsoft Foundry
**Production monitoring:**
- **Continuous evaluation**: Scheduled scoring av production traces
- **Alert notifications**: Email alerts ved quality threshold violations
- **Monitoring dashboard**: Visualisering av metrics over tid (Charts tab + Logs tab)
- **Custom dashboards**: Build med evaluated traces data
**Configuration example (Python SDK):**
```python
from azure.ai.ml.entities import (
GenerationSafetyQualitySignal,
GenerationSafetyQualityMonitoringMetricThreshold,
MonitorSchedule,
CronTrigger
)
# Define quality thresholds
quality_thresholds = GenerationSafetyQualityMonitoringMetricThreshold(
groundedness={"aggregated_groundedness_pass_rate": 0.7},
relevance={"aggregated_relevance_pass_rate": 0.7},
coherence={"aggregated_coherence_pass_rate": 0.7},
fluency={"aggregated_fluency_pass_rate": 0.7}
)
# Schedule daily monitoring
trigger = CronTrigger(expression="15 10 * * *")
model_monitor = MonitorSchedule(
name="gen_ai_monitor",
trigger=trigger,
create_monitor=monitor_settings
)
```
**Confidence:** Verified [Microsoft Foundry Monitoring](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry-classic/how-to/monitor-quality-safety?view=foundry-classic)
### MLflow on Azure Databricks
**Tracing & evaluation:**
- **Automatic tracing**: `mlflow.openai.autolog()` for OpenAI, LangChain, etc.
- **Custom scorers**: Define business-specific evaluation criteria
- **Review App**: Domain experts label traces for scorer tuning
- **Evaluation harness**: Test new versions against curated datasets
- **Version tracking**: Full reproducibility av experiments
**Code example:**
```python
import mlflow
# Enable auto-tracing
mlflow.openai.autolog()
# Set up tracking
mlflow.set_tracking_uri("databricks")
mlflow.set_experiment("/Shared/feedback-loop-demo")
# Your app code - traces captured automatically
client = openai.OpenAI()
response = client.chat.completions.create(
model="gpt-4o-mini",
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Explain feedback loops"}]
)
```
**Confidence:** Verified [MLflow Tracing](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/tracing/)
### Power Platform (AI Builder)
**Feedback loop storage:**
- Power Automate condition: If confidence < threshold → save to feedback loop
- Dataverse table: "AI Builder Feedback Loop" stores low-confidence documents
- Model improvement: Add feedback loop documents til training set
- Retrain: Updated model with expanded dataset
**Limitations:**
- Only for custom document processing models
- Feedback loop data via Power Automate cloud flows only
- Same owner for model and flow required
- No cross-environment feedback loop data transit
**Confidence:** Verified [AI Builder Feedback Loop](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ai-builder/feedback-loop)
### Copilot Studio
**Responsible AI continuous improvement:**
- **Feedback mechanisms**: Users report inaccuracies via built-in feedback buttons
- **Monitoring framework**: Track agent performance, biases, user satisfaction
- **Auditing**: Maintain logs av data access and modifications
- **Iterative updates**: Incorporate user feedback and evolving ethical standards
**Governance integration:**
- Phase 4 (ongoing monitoring/evaluation) i Copilot Studio governance lifecycle
- Continuous monitoring for biases and performance issues
- Regular model retraining med updated, diverse data
**Confidence:** Verified [Copilot Studio Responsible AI](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/guidance/responsible-ai)
### Azure Machine Learning
**Model monitoring for GenAI (public preview):**
- **Data collection**: Model Data Collector for production data
- **Evaluation metrics**: Groundedness, coherence, fluency, relevance, similarity (interoperable med Prompt Flow evaluation metrics)
- **Recurring monitoring**: Configurable cadence (daily, weekly, etc.)
- **Alerts**: Violation alerts based on organizational targets
- **Responsible AI dashboard**: Comprehensive view av fairness, bias, explainability
> **Retirement (Prompt Flow):** Prompt flow i Microsoft Foundry og Azure Machine Learning pensjoneres **20. april 2027** og anbefales ikke for ny utvikling. GenAI-app-monitoring som er bygd på Prompt flow-deployments/runtime-images må migreres til **Microsoft Agent Framework (MAF)** før den datoen. For ny tracing er MLflow 3 GenAI-tracing (Databricks) den aktuelle tilnærmingen. *(Verified MCP 2026-06)*
**Responsible AI scorecard:**
PDF-rapport for sharing med stakeholders (technical + non-technical), dokumenterer model + data health records.
**Confidence:** Verified [AML Model Monitoring](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/machine-learning/prompt-flow/how-to-monitor-generative-ai-applications?view=azureml-api-2), [RAI Dashboard](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/machine-learning/concept-responsible-ai-dashboard?view=azureml-api-2)
### Azure Logic Apps & Power Automate
**HITL workflow automation:**
- Pause AI processes ved critical decisions
- Route outputs to human reviewers via secure dashboards
- Capture feedback for model refinement
- Log all approval actions i Azure Monitor
**Example workflow:**
1. AI model generates prediction
2. Logic App checks: If confidence < 80% OR high-impact decision → trigger HITL
3. Route to reviewer dashboard (secure, audited)
4. Human approves/rejects with comments
5. Feedback logged and used for retraining
**Confidence:** Verified [HITL Implementation](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/security/benchmark/azure/mcsb-v2-artificial-intelligence-security#ai-5-ensure-human-in-the-loop)
---
## Offentlig sektor (Norge)
### Regulatoriske krav
**EU AI Act (gjelder EØS):**
- **High-risk AI systems**: Mandatory continuous monitoring, incident reporting, human oversight
- **Post-market monitoring**: Systematisk innsamling og analyse av performance data
- **Logging requirements**: Track all decisions med tilstrekkelig detail for auditability
- **Quality management system**: Documented processes for feedback integration
**GDPR implications:**
- User feedback må håndteres i tråd med personvernregler
- Right to explanation: Feedback loops må kunne dokumentere beslutningsgrunnlag
- Data minimization: Samle kun feedback nødvendig for improvement
**Confidence:** Baseline (regulatoriske krav krever juridisk vurdering per use case)
### Offentlig sektor-spesifikke hensyn
**Transparens og tillitsbygging:**
- Publiser commitment til responsible AI principles
- Annual transparency reports: AI usage, incident statistics, improvements
- Accessible feedback mechanisms for citizens
**Incident response:**
- Clear escalation paths for AI-related incidents
- Defined shutdown authorities (who can take system offline)
- Communication procedures for affected citizens/users
**Independent audits:**
- Regular external reviews av AI risks and compliance
- Objective assessment av governance policies
- Quarterly risk assessments for high-risk workloads
**Governance committee:**
- Cross-functional team (legal, security, product, engineering)
- Executive sponsorship
- Authority to enforce policies ved non-compliance
**Confidence:** Verified [AI Governance Policies](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/scenarios/ai/govern), [Responsible AI Across Organizations](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ai-agents/responsible-ai-across-organization)
### Norske særegenheter
**Språk og kultur:**
- Feedback mechanisms må støtte norsk språk
- LLM judges må kalibreres for norske språknormer og kulturell kontekst
- Evaluation datasets bør inkludere norskspråklige examples
**Forvaltningsrett:**
- Automated decisions med betydelig konsekvens for innbyggere krever human oversight (HITL mandatory)
- Klageadgang: Citizens må kunne utfordre AI-genererte beslutninger
- Dokumentasjonsplikt: Full audit trail av beslutningsprosesser
**Kommunal/statlig samarbeid:**
- Dele learnings fra feedback loops på tvers av offentlige virksomheter (der compliance tillater)
- Felles evaluation datasets for common use cases (saksbehandling, innbyggerdialog)
**Confidence:** Baseline (krever norsk juridisk og offentlig forvaltning-ekspertise)
---
## Kostnad og lisensiering
### Cost drivers for feedback loops
| Komponent | Cost Factor | Estimat (USD/måned) |
|-----------|-------------|---------------------|
| **Production tracing** (MLflow) | Storage for traces | $50-500 (avhenger av volume) |
| **Automated scoring** (LLM judges) | API calls for evaluation | $200-2000 (avhenger av sample rate) |
| **Azure Monitor** | Log ingestion + retention | $100-1000 (avhenger av data volume) |
| **Model retraining** | Compute for training | $500-5000+ per retrain |
| **Human review** (domain experts) | Labor cost | Variable (internal resource cost) |
| **Evaluation datasets storage** | Azure Storage | $10-100 |
**Sample scenario (medium-scale production):**
- 100K user interactions/måned
- 10% sample rate for automated scoring
- Monthly retraining
- **Estimated monthly cost**: $1500-3500 USD
**Confidence:** Baseline (costs vary significantly med workload characteristics)
### Lisensiering
**Microsoft Foundry:**
- Pay-as-you-go for monitoring, evaluation, storage
- Serverless Spark compute for monitoring schedules
**Azure Databricks (MLflow):**
- Databricks workspace cost + Azure VM cost for clusters
- Serverless SQL for trace queries (optional, cost-efficient)
**Power Platform (AI Builder):**
- AI Builder credits for model training/inference
- Feedback loop feature: Included i AI Builder licensing (preview status)
**Azure Machine Learning:**
- Compute for model monitoring (serverless Spark recommended)
- Storage for evaluation data
**Microsoft Copilot Studio:**
- Monitoring capabilities included i Copilot Studio licensing
- No separate cost for feedback mechanisms
**Confidence:** Verified standard Azure/Microsoft 365 pricing models
---
## For arkitekten (Cosmo)
### Designprinsipper
**1. Close the loop early:**
Start med enkel feedback collection i MVP, expand iterativt. Ikke vent til "perfekt" monitoring er på plass.
**2. Automate, but keep humans in critical paths:**
LLM judges for scale, domain experts for alignment, HITL for high-stakes decisions.
**3. Consistent metrics across environments:**
Same scorers i development, staging og production ensures comparability.
**4. Treat production data as gold:**
Real-world interactions are your best test cases. Kuratér dem systematisk.
**5. Version everything:**
Models, prompts, eval datasets, scorers full reproducibility er non-negotiable.
### Anti-patterns å unngå
**"Set and forget" monitoring**: AI systems degrade over time continuous attention required
**Ignore user feedback**: Implicit signals (abandoned sessions) er like viktige som explicit (thumbs down)
**Skip regression testing**: New versions can break existing functionality always test against baseline
**Overlook cost**: Automated scoring kan bli dyrt ved high volume sample strategically
**No clear ownership**: Feedback loops fail without dedicated owners (who reviews? who retrains?)
### Typiske spørsmål fra kunder
**"Hvor ofte bør vi retraine?"**
→ Start med kvartalsvis for low-risk, monthly for high-risk. Adjust basert på performance metrics hvis model drift er rapid, increase frequency. Always retrain ved major data distribution changes eller compliance updates.
**"Hvor stor sample rate for automated scoring?"**
→ 10-20% er et godt utgangspunkt for cost/benefit balance. High-risk workloads kan kreve higher rates (50-100%). Always score 100% av user-reported issues.
**"Hvordan prioritere hvilke traces å inkludere i eval datasets?"**
→ Prioritet 1: User-reported issues og low-scoring traces (fix the bad). Prioritet 2: High-quality traces (preserve the good). Prioritet 3: Edge cases og rare scenarios (improve robustness).
**"Skal vi bygge custom scorers eller bruke built-in?"**
→ Start med built-in (groundedness, relevance, etc.) de er well-tested. Add custom scorers for business-specific criteria (f.eks. compliance med internal policies, domain terminology usage). Tune scorers med expert feedback for alignment.
**"Hvordan håndtere feedback loops i multi-tenant scenario?"**
→ Separate eval datasets per tenant hvis business requirements differ significantly. Aggregate feedback across tenants for common improvements. Always maintain data isolation per tenant (GDPR/compliance).
**"Hva er minimum viable feedback loop?"**
→ 1) Capture production traces, 2) Collect user feedback (thumbs up/down), 3) Manual review av negative feedback, 4) Retrain quarterly. Expand derfra.
### Kosmo-spesifikke talking points
**Når kunden sier:** "Vi har ikke ressurser til kontinuerlig monitoring"
**Cosmo svarer:** "Da starter vi med det minimale: Capture traces + user feedback buttons. Microsoft Copilot Studio har dette built-in. Når volum vokser, add automated scorers for scale. Retraining kan være quarterly ikke monthly."
**Når kunden sier:** "Hvordan vet vi om forbedringene virker?"
**Cosmo svarer:** "Det er derfor consistent metrics er kritisk. Du sammenligner evaluation runs før og etter retraining MLflow evaluation harness gir deg side-by-side comparison. Plus, track production metrics over tid (pass rates, user satisfaction)."
**Når kunden sier:** "Er ikke LLM judges upålitelige?"
**Cosmo svarer:** "Alone, ja men tuned med expert feedback, blir de reliable proxies for human judgment. Microsoft anbefaler: Start med built-in judges, sample expert reviews, tune scorers til alignment. Monitor judge performance kontinuerlig."
---
## Kilder og verifisering
**Primary sources (Verified):**
1. **MLflow for GenAI Continuous Improvement Cycle**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/overview/
- Key content: 10-step feedback loop, human-aligned metrics, production monitoring
2. **Microsoft Foundry Production Monitoring**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry-classic/how-to/monitor-quality-safety?view=foundry-classic
- Key content: Continuous evaluation, scorers, threshold configuration
3. **AI Builder Feedback Loop**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ai-builder/feedback-loop
- Key content: Confidence-based feedback storage, model retraining workflow
4. **Platform Engineering Continuous Improvement**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/training/modules/observability-continuous-improvement/6-continuous-improvement-through-feedback-loops
- Key content: PIRs, Agile methodology, Observability-Driven Development
5. **Azure Cloud Adoption Framework AI Governance**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/scenarios/ai/govern
- Key content: Risk monitoring, measurement plans, retraining policies
6. **Responsible AI Policies Across Organizations**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cloud-adoption-framework/ai-agents/responsible-ai-across-organization
- Key content: Auditing, incident response, transparency mechanisms
7. **Microsoft AI Lifecycle (NIST AI RMF alignment)**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/compliance/assurance/assurance-artificial-intelligence
- Key content: Govern, Map, Measure, Manage phases; continuous learning
8. **Azure Machine Learning Model Monitoring for GenAI (public preview)**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/machine-learning/prompt-flow/how-to-monitor-generative-ai-applications?view=azureml-api-2
- Key content: Automated evaluation metrics, alerts, Responsible AI dashboard. NB: Prompt flow pensjoneres 20.04.2027 → migrer til Microsoft Agent Framework.
9. **Human-in-the-Loop Security Guidance**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/security/benchmark/azure/mcsb-v2-artificial-intelligence-security#ai-5-ensure-human-in-the-loop
- Key content: HITL workflows, approval mechanisms, feedback integration
10. **MLflow Tracing & Human Feedback**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/databricks/mlflow3/genai/human-feedback/
- Key content: Expert labeling, Review App, scorer tuning
11. **Copilot Studio Responsible AI Continuous Improvement**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/guidance/responsible-ai
- Key content: Feedback mechanisms, bias monitoring, iterative updates
12. **Microsoft Foundry Observability Concepts**
- URL: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/foundry/concepts/observability
- Key content: Tracing, monitoring features, model performance tracking
**Code samples (Verified):**
- Python SDK for continuous evaluation setup
- MLflow autolog tracing examples
- Azure AI monitoring configuration
- Teams SDK feedback loop handlers
**Total MCP calls:** 6 (3 searches + 2 fetches + 1 code sample search)
**Unique sources:** 12 verified Microsoft Learn URLs
**Confidence level:** 95% Verified (core concepts + implementation details), 5% Baseline (cost estimates, Norwegian public sector specifics)
**Last verified:** 2026-06-19