# Vendor facets — Khoros (Aurora community platform). An enterprise community with forums, a
# knowledge base, idea boards and blog boards: support_channel (half credit as Community), a blog
# board, and a conditional roadmap if the idea exchange is run as one.
vendor: khoros-ai
name: Khoros
website: https://khoros.ai
areas:
- community
registry_keys: []
rubric_schema_version: 0.22.0
generated: '2026-09-25'
features_refreshed: '2026-09-25'
basis: capability
summary: >-
  Khoros reaches three small developer_ergonomics and operational checks: support_channel (2 points, half
  when declared as Community because the probe skips that type), blog_present (1 point) for a blog board,
  and roadmap_present (2 points) only if an idea exchange is run as a real roadmap. Khoros community hosts
  answer bots with an anti-bot challenge, which the liveness probe scores as live. It is an enterprise
  purchase with no registry key, so no customer of it can be detected or measured.
features:
- id: community-platform
  name: Aurora community platform (forums, knowledge base, ideas, events, groups)
  description: A branded enterprise community serving support, engagement, education and feedback in one
    place.
  source: https://khoros.ai/platform/communities
  tier: enterprise
- id: blog-board
  name: Blog boards
  description: >-
    A board type with blog authors and moderators, alongside forum, knowledge base, Q&A, idea and contest
    boards.
  source: https://khoros.readthedocs.io/en/latest/boards.html
  tier: enterprise
- id: idea-exchange
  name: Idea exchange boards
  description: Idea boards where members submit and discuss ideas.
  source: https://khoros.readthedocs.io/en/latest/boards.html
  tier: enterprise
maps:
- feature: community-platform
  check: support_channel
  layer: composite
  credit: 0.5
  provider_must: >-
    Declare the community URL in apis.yml common[]. As Community it grades "unverified" (0.5) because
    probe-pointers.py does not probe Community; as Support it is probed, and both Khoros community URLs
    probed on 2026-09-22 graded js_challenge, which scores live (1.0).
  catalog_pass_rate: 0.45
  facet: developer_ergonomics
  points: 2
  baseline_pass_rate: 0.69
- feature: blog-board
  check: blog_present
  layer: composite
  provider_must: Run a blog board that the provider's team actually posts to, and declare its URL as Blog.
  note: >-
    The board types come from the open-source Khoros Python library's documentation (a third-party SDK
    over the Khoros Community API), not a Khoros product page; the Aurora page fetched lists forums, knowledge
    base, ideas, events and groups without naming blogs.
  catalog_pass_rate: 0.529
  facet: developer_ergonomics
  points: 1
  baseline_pass_rate: 0.731
- feature: idea-exchange
  check: roadmap_present
  layer: composite
  conditional: true
  condition: >-
    Only if the provider runs the idea exchange as a public roadmap (statuses it maintains for what is
    planned) and declares it as RoadMap; an idea inbox alone is not a roadmap.
  catalog_pass_rate: 0.011
  facet: operational_transparency
  points: 2
  baseline_pass_rate: 0.037
out_of_reach:
  checks:
  - contract_present
  - status_page_present
  - sdk_count_1
  - change_log_present
  note: >-
    A community platform routes people to answers; it does not produce the provider's contract, status
    page, SDKs or a changelog.
surface:
  operational_transparency:
    reachable: 2.0
    total: 38
  developer_ergonomics:
    reachable: 2.0
    total: 42
  agent_readiness:
    reachable: 0
    total: 139
hard_rule: >-
  A model, not a score. Adopting this vendor changes a provider's Kin Score only when the provider publishes
  the resulting artifacts on its own surface; nothing here writes a score, and no sponsorship or partnership
  can.
method: searched
source:
- https://khoros.ai/platform/communities
- https://khoros.readthedocs.io/en/latest/boards.html
measured:
  cohort:
    method: vendors-catalog.json detections (CNAME / header / URL shape / markup), never a name match
    detected: 0
    in_baseline: 0
  control:
    basis: providers earning contract_present + documentation_present + api_reference_present, minus the
      cohort
    n: 5216
  metric: >-
    cohort_pct / control_pct = mean share of the check's points earned (derived and platform credit weighted),
    x100
  measured_on: '2026-09-25'
  status: 'not measurable: 0 detected customers clear the baseline (need 20)'
simulation:
  simulated_on: '2026-09-25'
  rubric: 0.23.0
  population: providers publishing a contract (contract_present earned), replayable exactly
  providers: 8977
  providers_unreplayable: 987
  providers_moved: 4885
  conditional_rows: excluded (they depend on what the API already does)
  composite_lift:
    median: 0.4
    p75: 0.5
    p90: 0.9
    max: 1.0
    mean_among_movers: 0.6
  agent_readiness_lift:
    median: 0.0
    p75: 0.0
    p90: 0.0
    max: 0.0
    mean_among_movers: 0.0
  facet_lift_median_among_movers:
    developer_ergonomics: 2.4
  composite_band_moves:
    thin -> developing: 170
    emerging -> thin: 58
    developing -> strong: 35
    strong -> exemplar: 11
    minimal -> emerging: 1
  agent_readiness_band_moves: {}
  method: >-
    each provider's own kin/checks file, the vendor's maps at their stated credit, the scorer's composite
    formula; from -> to, nothing written