BetterSignalHQ · Signal Recovery Engine

The Signal Recovery Protocol

A 6-stage adversarial engine designed to identify the 10x architect and expose the "Paper Senior" before your team wastes a single hour.

The Signal Recovery Engine

01 · Intent Verification (motivation & fit)

02 · Ecosystem Intelligence (recent shifts)

03 · GitHub Trajectory (growth & quality)

04 · Claim-to-Signal (resume vs reality)

05 · Requirement Alignment (spec clarity)

06 · Logical Drift (interview probes)

07 · Hidden Invariants (system risk)

08 · Token Efficiency (AI leverage)

09 · Humanity Signature (behavioral trace)

10 · 2x Logic Replay (final review)

01

Stage 1 · Intent

Intent Verification

We filter for high-motivation, company-specific intent before we touch code. The engine looks for how precisely the candidate understands your domain, why they want this role, and whether they've done real homework on your stack and constraints.

intent_probe() fit: strong

Company Context

references roadmap & risks

Preparation

studied stack & product

Motivation

specific, non-generic

02

Stage 2 · Ecosystem

Ecosystem Intelligence (The "Passion Probe")

We test whether candidates are awake to the ecosystem they're building in—from React 19 shifts to security incidents like Log4j to AI's impact on their tools. High-signal architects continuously integrate new constraints into their mental model of the stack.

passion_probe() ecosystem-aware

React 19

mentions breaking changes & tradeoffs

Security

references Log4j & supply-chain risk

AI Impact

uses LLMs as tools, not crutches

03

Stage 3 · The Past

GitHub Trajectory Optional Background

We bypass "Green Squares." Instead, GitHub Trajectory maps language growth, commit quality, and architectural stewardship over time. This stage can be toggled on for candidates with public work, giving you a longitudinal view of how they actually evolved.

github_trajectory() mode: optional

Refactor Density

14 structural / 18 months

Stack Breadth

TS, Go, infra-as-code

Quality Trend

improving

[trajectory] languages=3 · code_reviewed=82% · anomalies=0

04

Stage 4 · The Resume

Claim-to-Signal Verification

Resumes are now AI-hallucinated. We cross-reference every claim—from "Kubernetes Expert" to "Low-Latency Guru"—against real-time performance in our probes. We flag the Integrity Gap immediately.

integrity_gap_scan() status: mismatch

Resume Claim

"SQL Expert" · "Performance Tuning"

Probe Result

Failed index-optimization + lock-contention probes

[gap] integrity_score=0.31 · recommendation=hard filter

05

Stage 5 · The Spec

Requirement Alignment Background

Before any coding, we test whether candidates interrogate the spec. High-signal architects clarify ambiguous milestones, dependencies, and failure modes instead of sprinting into code that solves the wrong problem.

requirement_alignment() spec: interrogated

Clarifying Questions

milestones, SLAs, edge-cases

Assumption Calls

explicit, documented

Risk Surfaced

delivery & failure modes

06

Stage 6 · The Interview

The Logical Drift Probe

We inject "Logical Drift"—a fundamental rule change in a standard problem that breaks LLM training data. AI-cheaters follow the training; Engineers follow the logic.

probe_logical_drift() mode: live

LLM Output

"standard solution detected"

Human Output

"constraint mismatch · re-evaluating requirement"

Drift Applied

+17%

LLM Failure

91%

Human Detection

72%

07

Stage 7 · The System

Hidden Invariant Testing

We present code with a hidden dependency mapped to dummy logs. A junior cleans the code and breaks the system. A Senior stops and asks: "What owns these orphaned keys?"

invariant_monitor() alert: breach

[09:14:03] candidate deletes "legacyMapping"

[09:14:04] ▶ invariant_breach: orphaned_log_entries_detected

[09:15:22] ▶ senior_candidate: "what owns these orphaned keys?"

Blind Refactor Score

high = risk

System Awareness

architect-level

08

Stage 8 · The Future

Token-to-Solution Efficiency

Modern 10x Engineers leverage AI as a force multiplier. We measure the "Token-to-Productivity Ratio." Can they guide an LLM to a complex fix in 2 prompts, or 20?

token_efficiency() 98th percentile

Prompt-to-Fix Path

Prompts used: 2 Redundant tokens: minimal

[Complexity: High... Prompts: 2... Token Efficiency: 98th Percentile]

09

Stage 9 · The Behavior

The Humanity Signature Background

We analyze non-linear coding telemetry. Real developers delete, pause, and refactor. LLMs dump perfect blocks of code. Our Signal Confidence Score guarantees a human brain is in control.

humanity_signature() signal: 0.94

Undo Events

human-like

Cursor Jumps

non-linear

Burst Pattern

messy, iterative

[Keystroke Trace... Undo Events: High... Non-linear Cursor Jumps...]

10

Stage 10 · Final Review

The 2x Logic Replay Background

We generate a high-speed filmstrip of the candidate’s entire thought process—every edit, pause, and branch—compressed into a 2x replay for your final decision review. Your team sees the real problem-solving arc, not just the end state.

logic_replay_2x()
0%
// Initial problem: sort by custom rule
function sort(arr) {
  return arr.sort((a, b) => a - b);
}
Starting...

Stop settling for "Safe Hires." Hire for Technical Truth.

Your roadmap is too fragile for Paper Seniors. BetterSignalHQ gives you the data to hire with 100% confidence.