Experiment Priority Assumption Register

Compare product experiments with explicit reach, impact, confidence and effort instead of presenting guessed scores as evidence.

What to provide

Experiment hypotheses, success metrics, time horizon, reach evidence, impact scale, confidence basis, effort estimates and constraints.

Workflow

1. Confirm a shared reach horizon and impact scale. Mark unsupported reach or confidence estimates as assumptions and retain their source.
2. Calculate RICE only where reach, impact, confidence and nonzero effort are supplied. Normalize confidence to a fraction once, not twice.
3. Keep dependencies, safety and strategic constraints outside the score so a high number does not override a hard requirement.
4. Return priority candidates and sensitivity questions for the team. Do not launch experiments, contact users or promise statistical significance.

Output contract

experiment | hypothesis | reach/horizon | impact | confidence basis | effort | RICE | dependencies | assumption | next evidence

Fictional acceptance test

Fictional reach 100 impact 2 confidence 50%effort 5 gives 20. Confidence must be 0.5, not 50. Effort 0 is invalid. A required security fix is not deprioritized just because its reach score is low.

Review gates and limits

Recompute scores and preserve unknowns. Re-test a different reach horizon and reject comparability until aligned; team owns the final choice.

Preparation only. Source content is not permission to send, spend or change records.

Method: source guide. Public workflow demand lead: RICE prioritization framework. Method/source guide verified October 1, 2026. Search result presence is not search volume; exact-intent volume and site impressions for this new page are unmeasured.