Zovda
Two teams with the same model, the same compute and the same schedule get different products. The difference is rarely the architecture, which everyone can copy within a quarter.
It is the data: which rows exist, how they were cut, what was excluded, and whether anyone can explain any of it six months later.
The advantages that compound
- A guideline that survives a change of annotator
- A schema that survives a change of engineer
- A held-out set that survives a change of model
- A record of what was tried and rejected
Each one is boring. Together they are the reason one team improves every quarter and another restarts every quarter.
What we build, concretely
Video and multimodal collections with annotation layers. Question banks with worked steps. Code and agent trajectories with the check that scores them. Image and image-text pairs with the fields that make them filterable. Audio with boundaries and conditions. Social collections with their frames and their dates.
Different modalities, one discipline: a unit you can define, fields you can filter, and a card that says what is missing.
What we promise, and what we do not
We reply within one business day, and we share data cards and field descriptions once the scope is confirmed. We do not claim that data alone ships a product, and we do not promise a number we have not measured on your slice.
The question worth asking
Not "how many rows", but "what will this change in the run I care about". If a supplier can answer that with a slice, a metric and a date, the rest is procurement.
Zovda builds these collections through Datuva. The corpus catalogue is the shortest path into all of it.
Tell us what you are training. We reply within one business day.