Files
ATOCore/scripts/extractor_eval.py

245 lines
8.7 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
"""Extractor eval runner — scores the rule-based extractor against a
labeled interaction corpus.
Pulls full interaction content from a frozen snapshot, runs each through
``extract_candidates_from_interaction``, and compares the output to the
expected counts from a labels file. Produces a per-label scorecard plus
aggregate precision / recall / yield numbers.
This harness deliberately stays file-based: snapshot + labels + this
runner. No Dalidou HTTP dependency once the snapshot is frozen, so the
eval is reproducible run-to-run even as live captures drift.
Usage:
python scripts/extractor_eval.py # human report
python scripts/extractor_eval.py --json # machine-readable
python scripts/extractor_eval.py \\
--snapshot scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json \\
--labels scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json
"""
from __future__ import annotations
import argparse
import json
import sys
from dataclasses import dataclass, field
from pathlib import Path
# Make src/ importable without requiring an install.
_REPO_ROOT = Path(__file__).resolve().parent.parent
sys.path.insert(0, str(_REPO_ROOT / "src"))
from atocore.interactions.service import Interaction # noqa: E402
from atocore.memory.extractor import extract_candidates_from_interaction # noqa: E402
feat(eval-loop): Day 4 — LLM-assisted extractor path (additive, flagged) Day 2 baseline showed 0% recall for the rule-based extractor across 5 distinct miss classes. Day 4 decision gate: prototype an LLM-assisted mode behind a flag. Option A ratified by Antoine. New module src/atocore/memory/extractor_llm.py: - extract_candidates_llm(interaction) returns the same MemoryCandidate dataclass the rule extractor produces, so both paths flow through the existing triage / candidate pipeline unchanged. - extract_candidates_llm_verbose() also returns the raw model output and any error string, for eval and debugging. - Uses Claude Haiku 4.5 by default; model overridable via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_MODEL env. Timeout via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_TIMEOUT_S (default 20s). - Silent-failure contract: missing API key, unreachable model, malformed JSON — all return [] and log an error. Never raises into the caller. The capture audit trail must not break on an optional side effect. - Parser tolerates markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid memory types, clamps confidence to [0,1], drops empty content. - System prompt explicitly tells the model to return [] for most conversational turns (durable-fact bar, not "extract everything"). - Trust rules unchanged: candidates are never auto-promoted, extraction stays off the capture hot path, human triages via the existing CLI. scripts/extractor_eval.py: new --mode {rule,llm} flag so the same labeled corpus can be scored against both extractors. Default remains rule so existing invocations are unchanged. tests/test_extractor_llm.py: 12 new unit tests covering the parser (empty array, malformed JSON, markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid types, empty content, confidence clamping, version tagging), plus contract tests for missing API key, empty response, and a mocked api_error path so failure modes never raise. Test count: 264 -> 276 passing. No existing tests changed. Next step: run `python scripts/extractor_eval.py --mode llm` against the labeled set with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY in env, record the delta, decide whether to wire LLM mode into the API endpoint and CLI or keep it script-only for now. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:18:30 -04:00
from atocore.memory.extractor_llm import extract_candidates_llm # noqa: E402
feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
DEFAULT_SNAPSHOT = _REPO_ROOT / "scripts" / "eval_data" / "interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json"
DEFAULT_LABELS = _REPO_ROOT / "scripts" / "eval_data" / "extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json"
@dataclass
class LabelResult:
id: str
expected_count: int
actual_count: int
ok: bool
miss_class: str
notes: str
actual_candidates: list[dict] = field(default_factory=list)
def load_snapshot(path: Path) -> dict[str, dict]:
data = json.loads(path.read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
return {item["id"]: item for item in data.get("interactions", [])}
def load_labels(path: Path) -> dict:
return json.loads(path.read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
def interaction_from_snapshot(snap: dict) -> Interaction:
return Interaction(
id=snap["id"],
prompt=snap.get("prompt", "") or "",
response=snap.get("response", "") or "",
response_summary="",
project=snap.get("project", "") or "",
client=snap.get("client", "") or "",
session_id=snap.get("session_id", "") or "",
created_at=snap.get("created_at", "") or "",
)
feat(eval-loop): Day 4 — LLM-assisted extractor path (additive, flagged) Day 2 baseline showed 0% recall for the rule-based extractor across 5 distinct miss classes. Day 4 decision gate: prototype an LLM-assisted mode behind a flag. Option A ratified by Antoine. New module src/atocore/memory/extractor_llm.py: - extract_candidates_llm(interaction) returns the same MemoryCandidate dataclass the rule extractor produces, so both paths flow through the existing triage / candidate pipeline unchanged. - extract_candidates_llm_verbose() also returns the raw model output and any error string, for eval and debugging. - Uses Claude Haiku 4.5 by default; model overridable via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_MODEL env. Timeout via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_TIMEOUT_S (default 20s). - Silent-failure contract: missing API key, unreachable model, malformed JSON — all return [] and log an error. Never raises into the caller. The capture audit trail must not break on an optional side effect. - Parser tolerates markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid memory types, clamps confidence to [0,1], drops empty content. - System prompt explicitly tells the model to return [] for most conversational turns (durable-fact bar, not "extract everything"). - Trust rules unchanged: candidates are never auto-promoted, extraction stays off the capture hot path, human triages via the existing CLI. scripts/extractor_eval.py: new --mode {rule,llm} flag so the same labeled corpus can be scored against both extractors. Default remains rule so existing invocations are unchanged. tests/test_extractor_llm.py: 12 new unit tests covering the parser (empty array, malformed JSON, markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid types, empty content, confidence clamping, version tagging), plus contract tests for missing API key, empty response, and a mocked api_error path so failure modes never raise. Test count: 264 -> 276 passing. No existing tests changed. Next step: run `python scripts/extractor_eval.py --mode llm` against the labeled set with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY in env, record the delta, decide whether to wire LLM mode into the API endpoint and CLI or keep it script-only for now. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:18:30 -04:00
def score(snapshot: dict[str, dict], labels_doc: dict, mode: str = "rule") -> list[LabelResult]:
feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
results: list[LabelResult] = []
for label in labels_doc["labels"]:
iid = label["id"]
snap = snapshot.get(iid)
if snap is None:
results.append(
LabelResult(
id=iid,
expected_count=int(label.get("expected_count", 0)),
actual_count=-1,
ok=False,
miss_class="not_in_snapshot",
notes=label.get("notes", ""),
)
)
continue
interaction = interaction_from_snapshot(snap)
feat(eval-loop): Day 4 — LLM-assisted extractor path (additive, flagged) Day 2 baseline showed 0% recall for the rule-based extractor across 5 distinct miss classes. Day 4 decision gate: prototype an LLM-assisted mode behind a flag. Option A ratified by Antoine. New module src/atocore/memory/extractor_llm.py: - extract_candidates_llm(interaction) returns the same MemoryCandidate dataclass the rule extractor produces, so both paths flow through the existing triage / candidate pipeline unchanged. - extract_candidates_llm_verbose() also returns the raw model output and any error string, for eval and debugging. - Uses Claude Haiku 4.5 by default; model overridable via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_MODEL env. Timeout via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_TIMEOUT_S (default 20s). - Silent-failure contract: missing API key, unreachable model, malformed JSON — all return [] and log an error. Never raises into the caller. The capture audit trail must not break on an optional side effect. - Parser tolerates markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid memory types, clamps confidence to [0,1], drops empty content. - System prompt explicitly tells the model to return [] for most conversational turns (durable-fact bar, not "extract everything"). - Trust rules unchanged: candidates are never auto-promoted, extraction stays off the capture hot path, human triages via the existing CLI. scripts/extractor_eval.py: new --mode {rule,llm} flag so the same labeled corpus can be scored against both extractors. Default remains rule so existing invocations are unchanged. tests/test_extractor_llm.py: 12 new unit tests covering the parser (empty array, malformed JSON, markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid types, empty content, confidence clamping, version tagging), plus contract tests for missing API key, empty response, and a mocked api_error path so failure modes never raise. Test count: 264 -> 276 passing. No existing tests changed. Next step: run `python scripts/extractor_eval.py --mode llm` against the labeled set with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY in env, record the delta, decide whether to wire LLM mode into the API endpoint and CLI or keep it script-only for now. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:18:30 -04:00
if mode == "llm":
candidates = extract_candidates_llm(interaction)
else:
candidates = extract_candidates_from_interaction(interaction)
feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
actual_count = len(candidates)
expected_count = int(label.get("expected_count", 0))
results.append(
LabelResult(
id=iid,
expected_count=expected_count,
actual_count=actual_count,
ok=(actual_count == expected_count),
miss_class=label.get("miss_class", "n/a"),
notes=label.get("notes", ""),
actual_candidates=[
{
"memory_type": c.memory_type,
"content": c.content,
"project": c.project,
"rule": c.rule,
}
for c in candidates
],
)
)
return results
def aggregate(results: list[LabelResult]) -> dict:
total = len(results)
exact_match = sum(1 for r in results if r.ok)
true_positive = sum(1 for r in results if r.expected_count > 0 and r.actual_count > 0)
false_positive_interactions = sum(
1 for r in results if r.expected_count == 0 and r.actual_count > 0
)
false_negative_interactions = sum(
1 for r in results if r.expected_count > 0 and r.actual_count == 0
)
positive_expected = sum(1 for r in results if r.expected_count > 0)
total_expected_candidates = sum(r.expected_count for r in results)
total_actual_candidates = sum(max(r.actual_count, 0) for r in results)
yield_rate = total_actual_candidates / total if total else 0.0
# Recall over interaction count that had at least one expected candidate:
recall = true_positive / positive_expected if positive_expected else 0.0
# Precision over interaction count that produced any candidate:
precision_denom = true_positive + false_positive_interactions
precision = true_positive / precision_denom if precision_denom else 0.0
# Miss class breakdown
miss_classes: dict[str, int] = {}
for r in results:
if r.expected_count > 0 and r.actual_count == 0:
key = r.miss_class or "unlabeled"
miss_classes[key] = miss_classes.get(key, 0) + 1
return {
"total": total,
"exact_match": exact_match,
"positive_expected": positive_expected,
"total_expected_candidates": total_expected_candidates,
"total_actual_candidates": total_actual_candidates,
"yield_rate": round(yield_rate, 3),
"recall": round(recall, 3),
"precision": round(precision, 3),
"false_positive_interactions": false_positive_interactions,
"false_negative_interactions": false_negative_interactions,
"miss_classes": miss_classes,
}
def print_human(results: list[LabelResult], summary: dict) -> None:
print("=== Extractor eval ===")
print(
f"labeled={summary['total']} "
f"exact_match={summary['exact_match']} "
f"positive_expected={summary['positive_expected']}"
)
print(
f"yield={summary['yield_rate']} "
f"recall={summary['recall']} "
f"precision={summary['precision']}"
)
print(
f"false_positives={summary['false_positive_interactions']} "
f"false_negatives={summary['false_negative_interactions']}"
)
print()
print("miss class breakdown (FN):")
if summary["miss_classes"]:
for k, v in sorted(summary["miss_classes"].items(), key=lambda kv: -kv[1]):
print(f" {v:3d} {k}")
else:
print(" (none)")
print()
print("per-interaction:")
for r in results:
marker = "OK " if r.ok else "MISS"
iid_short = r.id[:8]
print(f" {marker} {iid_short} expected={r.expected_count} actual={r.actual_count} class={r.miss_class}")
if r.actual_candidates:
for c in r.actual_candidates:
preview = (c["content"] or "")[:80]
print(f" [{c['memory_type']}] {preview}")
def print_json(results: list[LabelResult], summary: dict) -> None:
payload = {
"summary": summary,
"results": [
{
"id": r.id,
"expected_count": r.expected_count,
"actual_count": r.actual_count,
"ok": r.ok,
"miss_class": r.miss_class,
"notes": r.notes,
"actual_candidates": r.actual_candidates,
}
for r in results
],
}
json.dump(payload, sys.stdout, indent=2)
sys.stdout.write("\n")
def main() -> int:
parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(description="AtoCore extractor eval")
parser.add_argument("--snapshot", type=Path, default=DEFAULT_SNAPSHOT)
parser.add_argument("--labels", type=Path, default=DEFAULT_LABELS)
parser.add_argument("--json", action="store_true", help="emit machine-readable JSON")
feat(eval-loop): Day 4 — LLM-assisted extractor path (additive, flagged) Day 2 baseline showed 0% recall for the rule-based extractor across 5 distinct miss classes. Day 4 decision gate: prototype an LLM-assisted mode behind a flag. Option A ratified by Antoine. New module src/atocore/memory/extractor_llm.py: - extract_candidates_llm(interaction) returns the same MemoryCandidate dataclass the rule extractor produces, so both paths flow through the existing triage / candidate pipeline unchanged. - extract_candidates_llm_verbose() also returns the raw model output and any error string, for eval and debugging. - Uses Claude Haiku 4.5 by default; model overridable via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_MODEL env. Timeout via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_TIMEOUT_S (default 20s). - Silent-failure contract: missing API key, unreachable model, malformed JSON — all return [] and log an error. Never raises into the caller. The capture audit trail must not break on an optional side effect. - Parser tolerates markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid memory types, clamps confidence to [0,1], drops empty content. - System prompt explicitly tells the model to return [] for most conversational turns (durable-fact bar, not "extract everything"). - Trust rules unchanged: candidates are never auto-promoted, extraction stays off the capture hot path, human triages via the existing CLI. scripts/extractor_eval.py: new --mode {rule,llm} flag so the same labeled corpus can be scored against both extractors. Default remains rule so existing invocations are unchanged. tests/test_extractor_llm.py: 12 new unit tests covering the parser (empty array, malformed JSON, markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid types, empty content, confidence clamping, version tagging), plus contract tests for missing API key, empty response, and a mocked api_error path so failure modes never raise. Test count: 264 -> 276 passing. No existing tests changed. Next step: run `python scripts/extractor_eval.py --mode llm` against the labeled set with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY in env, record the delta, decide whether to wire LLM mode into the API endpoint and CLI or keep it script-only for now. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:18:30 -04:00
parser.add_argument(
"--mode",
choices=["rule", "llm"],
default="rule",
help="which extractor to score (default: rule)",
)
feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
args = parser.parse_args()
snapshot = load_snapshot(args.snapshot)
labels = load_labels(args.labels)
feat(eval-loop): Day 4 — LLM-assisted extractor path (additive, flagged) Day 2 baseline showed 0% recall for the rule-based extractor across 5 distinct miss classes. Day 4 decision gate: prototype an LLM-assisted mode behind a flag. Option A ratified by Antoine. New module src/atocore/memory/extractor_llm.py: - extract_candidates_llm(interaction) returns the same MemoryCandidate dataclass the rule extractor produces, so both paths flow through the existing triage / candidate pipeline unchanged. - extract_candidates_llm_verbose() also returns the raw model output and any error string, for eval and debugging. - Uses Claude Haiku 4.5 by default; model overridable via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_MODEL env. Timeout via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_TIMEOUT_S (default 20s). - Silent-failure contract: missing API key, unreachable model, malformed JSON — all return [] and log an error. Never raises into the caller. The capture audit trail must not break on an optional side effect. - Parser tolerates markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid memory types, clamps confidence to [0,1], drops empty content. - System prompt explicitly tells the model to return [] for most conversational turns (durable-fact bar, not "extract everything"). - Trust rules unchanged: candidates are never auto-promoted, extraction stays off the capture hot path, human triages via the existing CLI. scripts/extractor_eval.py: new --mode {rule,llm} flag so the same labeled corpus can be scored against both extractors. Default remains rule so existing invocations are unchanged. tests/test_extractor_llm.py: 12 new unit tests covering the parser (empty array, malformed JSON, markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid types, empty content, confidence clamping, version tagging), plus contract tests for missing API key, empty response, and a mocked api_error path so failure modes never raise. Test count: 264 -> 276 passing. No existing tests changed. Next step: run `python scripts/extractor_eval.py --mode llm` against the labeled set with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY in env, record the delta, decide whether to wire LLM mode into the API endpoint and CLI or keep it script-only for now. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:18:30 -04:00
results = score(snapshot, labels, mode=args.mode)
feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
summary = aggregate(results)
feat(eval-loop): Day 4 — LLM-assisted extractor path (additive, flagged) Day 2 baseline showed 0% recall for the rule-based extractor across 5 distinct miss classes. Day 4 decision gate: prototype an LLM-assisted mode behind a flag. Option A ratified by Antoine. New module src/atocore/memory/extractor_llm.py: - extract_candidates_llm(interaction) returns the same MemoryCandidate dataclass the rule extractor produces, so both paths flow through the existing triage / candidate pipeline unchanged. - extract_candidates_llm_verbose() also returns the raw model output and any error string, for eval and debugging. - Uses Claude Haiku 4.5 by default; model overridable via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_MODEL env. Timeout via ATOCORE_LLM_EXTRACTOR_TIMEOUT_S (default 20s). - Silent-failure contract: missing API key, unreachable model, malformed JSON — all return [] and log an error. Never raises into the caller. The capture audit trail must not break on an optional side effect. - Parser tolerates markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid memory types, clamps confidence to [0,1], drops empty content. - System prompt explicitly tells the model to return [] for most conversational turns (durable-fact bar, not "extract everything"). - Trust rules unchanged: candidates are never auto-promoted, extraction stays off the capture hot path, human triages via the existing CLI. scripts/extractor_eval.py: new --mode {rule,llm} flag so the same labeled corpus can be scored against both extractors. Default remains rule so existing invocations are unchanged. tests/test_extractor_llm.py: 12 new unit tests covering the parser (empty array, malformed JSON, markdown fences, surrounding prose, invalid types, empty content, confidence clamping, version tagging), plus contract tests for missing API key, empty response, and a mocked api_error path so failure modes never raise. Test count: 264 -> 276 passing. No existing tests changed. Next step: run `python scripts/extractor_eval.py --mode llm` against the labeled set with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY in env, record the delta, decide whether to wire LLM mode into the API endpoint and CLI or keep it script-only for now. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:18:30 -04:00
summary["mode"] = args.mode
feat(eval-loop): Day 1+2 — labeled extractor corpus + baseline scorecard Day 1 (labeled corpus): - scripts/eval_data/interactions_snapshot_2026-04-11.json — frozen snapshot of 64 real claude-code interactions pulled from live Dalidou (test-client captures filtered out). This is the stable corpus the whole mini-phase labels against, independent of future captures. - scripts/eval_data/extractor_labels_2026-04-11.json — 20 hand-labeled interactions drawn by length-stratified random sample. Positives: 5/20 = ~25%, total expected candidates: 7. Plan deviation: Codex's plan asked for 30 (10/10/10 buckets); the real corpus is heavily skewed toward instructional/status content, so honest labeling of 20 already crosses the fail-early threshold of "at least 5 plausible positives" without padding. Day 2 (baseline measurement): - scripts/extractor_eval.py — file-based eval runner that loads the snapshot + labels, runs extract_candidates_from_interaction on each, and reports yield / recall / precision / miss-class breakdown. Returns exit 1 on any false positive or false negative. Current rule extractor against the labeled set: labeled=20 exact_match=15 positive_expected=5 yield=0.0 recall=0.0 precision=0.0 false_negatives=5 false_positives=0 miss_classes: recommendation_prose architectural_change_summary spec_update_announcement layered_recommendation alignment_assertion Interpretation: the rule-based extractor matches exactly zero of the 5 plausible positive interactions in the labeled set, and the misses are spread across 5 distinct cue classes with no single dominant pattern. This is the Day 4 hard-stop signal landing on Day 2 — a single rule expansion cannot close a 5-way miss, and widening rules blindly will collapse precision. The right move is to go straight to the Day 4 decision gate and consider LLM-assisted extraction. Escalating to DEV-LEDGER.md as R5 for human ratification before continuing. Not skipping Day 3 silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-11 15:11:33 -04:00
if args.json:
print_json(results, summary)
else:
print_human(results, summary)
return 0 if summary["false_negative_interactions"] == 0 and summary["false_positive_interactions"] == 0 else 1
if __name__ == "__main__":
raise SystemExit(main())