Bring a practical school question, a technical failure case or a research method we should examine. We are looking for contributions that make the next result more useful and easier to assess.
Valkor is in development. Hardware checks and synthetic routing experiments are separate workstreams. Dynamic emergency routing is not deployed as an active school safety system.
Contribute to the work
We welcome specific critiques, technical contributions and conversations about a controlled evaluation. Start with one question, the experience you bring, and the evidence that would make an answer useful.
Review a routing assumption, suggest a reproducible comparison, or help define how to measure doorway flow and uncertainty. A useful starting contribution is a written critique of one experiment and the evidence it would need.
Discuss a research questionHelp investigate a specific failure case, review graph and observation interfaces, or improve reproducible tests. Start with a small scenario, expected behavior and a way to check the result.
Discuss a technical contributionDescribe a real information gap, walk through the current process, and identify what staff would need to verify. You can also discuss a limited evaluation with agreed devices, zones, hours, privacy rules and stop conditions.
Discuss school needsEmail links open a draft in your email app. No message is sent by the website.
The problem we are investigating
When a badge observation, a pass and a staff report do not agree, someone has to decide what to check next. Valkor is exploring whether a shared view of the last observation, its age and the expected activity can make that review more useful.
Schools are the starting point for this work. The intended users are the staff responsible for movement, attendance follow up and operational coordination. A badge observation would supplement their review; official records and staff verification remain essential.
This is a product hypothesis. Discovery conversations need to establish which situations occur, how schools handle them today, what information is missing, and whether another tool would help. We have not established time savings, purchasing demand or improved emergency outcomes.
As findings become available, we will describe their scope and limits and use them to refine what we build and test.
Help define a useful evaluationA proposed evaluation, scoped together
A first conversation can focus on a current workflow without collecting identifiable student information. Any later evaluation would need a written scope and the school’s required approvals before data collection or installation.
Walk through how staff handle it today, what information they trust, and what would count as useful additional context.
Specify devices, zones, participants, operating hours, permissions, retention, deletion and who can stop the evaluation.
Define observation checks, missing and stale data, failure cases and staff feedback in advance. Retain existing attendance, pass and emergency procedures.
Document what worked, what failed and what remains unknown. Decide whether to revise, retest or stop without assuming an expansion or purchase.
A controlled location evaluation would assess observations and staff information needs. It would not depend on live emergency routing or replace established safety procedures.
Discuss an evaluation