Task 3.8. A number in a roadmap that nobody can regenerate is a claim, not a
measurement. One entry point now writes them all from the committed artifacts
and puts the denominator beside each: how many pairs could be scored, why the
rest could not, which taxonomy version scored them, the noise the family shows
against itself, and what the run cost per pair it got right. Every table says
whether hierarchical partial credit could apply, which today it cannot.
The roadmap section is replaced in place between markers rather than appended,
so the file cannot accumulate a stale number beside a fresh one, and running the
command twice without new artifacts changes nothing. With no baseline recorded
it says so instead of printing an empty table.
The corrected mechanism-lever number travels with the rest: detected five of
seventeen at a negative Youden once only train-split pairs teach, against seven
when every pair taught, with the difference named as what holdout pairs stopped
teaching. Round zero now records what it spent so the cost column has a source.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
The round-zero test decided which materialized side it was looking at by
searching the whole path for a substring, and the random temporary directory
name sometimes contained it. The detector then "found" the bug on the fixed side
too, the pair flipped, and the model comparison failed about one run in eight.
The check is now the directory name alone. This matters beyond the test: a noise
floor exists to measure how much a detector disagrees with itself, and noise
coming from the harness would be recorded as the detector's own and inflate
every family's regression budget.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
Task 3.3. Before anything learns, every family gets the same detector and is
measured against itself. Running a pair several times at the same settings does
not give the same answer, because the chat provider offers no seed, so the
spread between runs is real and unavoidable. That spread is the family's noise
floor and it becomes the budget a later round must stay inside before a
cross-family change counts as a regression. Choosing a budget instead of
measuring one would be a guess dressed as a threshold.
A pair the corpus already marked unscorable is never run: spending model calls
on a row that cannot be scored buys nothing and would put its noise into a floor
where it does not belong.
Artifacts are keyed by detector model, so a second model is baselined by
changing the model and running again, and the comparison table reads both side
by side. A model swap never touches a configuration, which is what makes the two
numbers comparable and reconsidering the model cheap. The web slices are the
default selection and the memory-safety family is measured with its floor marked
as never gating a round.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
