mirror of
https://github.com/norandom/OpenUltraSAST.git
synced 2026-10-20 05:29:28 +00:00
fix(ci): run ruff format, and record run 5 at 90% pair-correct
CI was red on `ruff format --check`: 23 files. I ran `ruff check` after every
change this session and never once ran `ruff format --check`, though CI runs
both. Lint passing is not formatting passing, and I treated one as evidence for
the other for the whole session.
Formatting applied. The full CI sequence now reproduces locally: format, lint,
mypy over 94 files, 735 tests, three gates byte-identical, compileall, and the
semantic job's 16 marked tests.
Also records run 5 of the pipeline measurement, which the vampi fix lifted as
predicted:
hunter (K=5) pipeline (K=1)
pair-correct 76.7% 90.0%
leak 12.3% 6.7%
detection -- 96.7%
cost ~$0.69 $0.0068
27 of 30 pairs. Five runs, each step from a measurement contradicting an
assumption: 73.3 (no pipeline path) -> 73.3 (routing fixed, IDENTICAL, which
exposed the discarded verdict) -> 80.0 (residual question matched to its
arbiter) -> 86.7 (aiohttp settings) -> 90.0 (dominance question no longer
contradicting its own evidence).
One miss left: dsvpwa-dsvpwa-main, whose setting is an argparse --ssl default
rather than a security-setting call. Out of reach before the settings work and
still is; contorting the arbiter around one pair would be worse than the miss.
The caveat is recorded beside the number: 30 pairs of one slice, and the slice
iterated against all session. The +16% overfitting gap against vfc-js is why
contributor-scan Req 8.1/8.2 exist.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
This commit is contained in:
co-authored by
Claude Opus 5
parent
14ca0a96ce
commit
fe45081b43
@@ -56,15 +56,16 @@ def render(rows: Sequence[SliceRow], *, development: str = "", deciding: str = "
|
||||
|
||||
total_pairs = sum(row.pairs for row in rows)
|
||||
total_covered = sum(row.covered for row in rows)
|
||||
lines += ["", f"Across every slice: {total_covered}/{total_pairs} = {total_covered / total_pairs:.0%} "
|
||||
"— read the rows above it, not this line."]
|
||||
lines += [
|
||||
"",
|
||||
f"Across every slice: {total_covered}/{total_pairs} = {total_covered / total_pairs:.0%} — read the rows above it, not this line.",
|
||||
]
|
||||
|
||||
gap = overfitting_gap(rows, development=development, deciding=deciding)
|
||||
if gap is not None:
|
||||
lines += [
|
||||
"",
|
||||
f"**Overfitting gap: {gap:+.0%}** — `{development}` (development) minus `{deciding}`, "
|
||||
f"which is the deciding real-world slice.",
|
||||
f"**Overfitting gap: {gap:+.0%}** — `{development}` (development) minus `{deciding}`, which is the deciding real-world slice.",
|
||||
]
|
||||
elif development or deciding:
|
||||
lines += ["", f"**Overfitting gap: not measurable** — `{development}` or `{deciding}` is absent from this run."]
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user