Reject Duplicate Field

Review ask

As a clinical trial statistician or programmer, challenge anything in this benchmark: describe a problem in Comments, or propose a fix with the Edit button on any source file.

Task: Is this a specification error a study team could realistically make, and should the build stop on it rather than continue?
Inputs: Do they trigger the failure for the reason the summary gives?
Expected failure: Is this the right error, raised at the right point, and would it tell the programmer what to fix?

The other tabs beside Comments are background for assessment, not under review.

Summary

EditUnder reviewWhat this benchmark means

README.md

Goal: build a subject-level listing carrying SITEID and SEX.

Input: collected demographics records for two subjects at one site, carrying SITEID and two fields both named SEX. The two fields agree for the first subject and disagree for the second, so no single answer is defensible there.

Variables:

SITEID would contain the site the subject enrolled at, copied from the collected records.
SEX would contain the recorded sex, copied from the collected records, but a value asked for by that name could come from either of the two fields, which disagree for the second subject.

The run is rejected when the listing is read and no artifact is accepted.

How to fix

Give every field of the listing its own name. If the second field holds the sex as it was first collected, name it for that, and read whichever one the study governs:

STUDYID,USUBJID,SITEID,SEX,SEXORIG

If the two fields hold the same fact twice, remove one at the source. A listing that answers to one name twice cannot be read the same way twice.

Expected failure

Editthe run is rejected; no artifact is accepted

expected/error.yaml

phase: ingest
condition: source_field_name_duplicate
requirement: REQ-0851

expected/error.yaml

phase: ingest
condition: source_field_name_duplicate
spec_paths:
  - input.DM.path
requirement: REQ-0851
context:
  dataset: DM
  path: input/dm.csv
  record: 1
  field: SEX

YAML specification

1 spec file

spec.yaml

Edit30 lines

1schema_version: "1.0"2domain: ADSL3keys: [STUDYID, USUBJID]4input:5  DM: input/dm.csv67output:8  path: adsl.csv9  columns: [STUDYID, USUBJID, SITEID, SEX]1011columns:12  - name: STUDYID13    type: str14    label: Study Identifier15    derivation: DM.STUDYID1617  - name: USUBJID18    type: str19    label: Unique Subject Identifier20    derivation: DM.USUBJID2122  - name: SITEID23    type: str24    label: Study Site Identifier25    derivation: DM.SITEID2627  - name: SEX28    type: str29    label: Sex30    derivation: DM.SEX

Inputs

Under review1 source file

input/dm.csv

Editraw CSV

Showing raw CSV because the source is not a valid rectangular table.

STUDYID,USUBJID,SITEID,SEX,SEX
YAMAA-01,YAMAA-01-101,101,F,F
YAMAA-01,YAMAA-01-102,101,M,F

Unexpected Output

Under reviewNo artifact is produced

No fixture files in this directory.

Shaded columns are derived— = missing value

Comments and assessment materials

Dataset Name	Variable Name	Variable Label	Type	Computational Method	Origin
ADSL	STUDYID	Study Identifier	character	Copy value from DM.STUDYID.	Predecessor
ADSL	USUBJID	Unique Subject Identifier	character	Copy value from DM.USUBJID.	Predecessor
ADSL	SITEID	Study Site Identifier	character	Copy value from DM.SITEID.	Predecessor
ADSL	SEX	Sex	character	Copy value from DM.SEX.	Predecessor

Version	Date	Author	Description
1.3	2026-09-29	yamaa docs build	Show study codelist names, external dictionaries, and ISO 8601 formats in variable rows; list the document's codelist values and metadata
1.2	2026-09-29	yamaa docs build	Classify ADaM copies from a declared input as Predecessor and recodes as Derived, and SDTM recodes of locally derived columns as Derived
1.1	2026-09-29	yamaa docs build	Resolve lookups into the donor record they select, and give every derivation shape a plain-language rule instead of its raw YAML
1.0		yamaa docs build	Initial generation from spec.yaml

How to fix

input/dm.csv

Comments

Mapping spec