6 ms·
The R1C1 normalization is smart. Treating 5k copied formulas as one "finding" is the only way to avoid alert fatigue. Re: magic numbers, have you considered ch
by JustinXie 8mo ago
The R1C1 normalization is smart. Treating 5k copied formulas as one "finding" is the only way to avoid alert fatigue.
Re: magic numbers, have you considered checking column headers as a signal? E.g., if a header contains "Rate" or "Months", a hardcoded number is likely a valid constant. If it's just "Total", * 1.2 is probably a hidden risk. How do you handle cases where the context is ambiguous?
- CherishRoby 8mo agoGreat question! I am using column headers as context signals. If a column is named 'Rate', 'Price', 'Percentage', or 'Count', I'm more lenient with constants in formulas referencing it. For ambiguous cases like 'Total', I currently flag it and let the user decide—which isn't ideal. I've been considering a confidence score system where: High confidence whitelist: 24, 60, 7, 365 (time conversions) Context-dependent: numbers near column headers with semantic meaning Always flag: arbitrary numbers like 1.2, 847, etc. unless they're in a 'Constants' or 'Assumptions' section The hardest edge case is something like Revenue * 0.15 where 0.15 might be a legitimate tax rate OR a hardcoded assumption that should be in a named cell. Right now I flag it as medium priority. How would you approach this?