drop safety/availability from scoring, holistic p4 rating, phase-parallel pipeline

safety and availability don't reduce to physics formulas the way
power_density/range_fuel/cost_efficiency do -- they're judgment calls
(risk assessment, infrastructure prevalence), and running them through the
same log-normalize() built for physical quantities produced incoherent
results: safety's raw value is already a "0-1" score, and normalizing it
again turned 0.6 into an unexplainable 0.678 that even the LLM reviewing
it could only cite, never justify (see combo 1540). Removed both from
domain_metric_weights (safety from 4 domains, availability from
urban_commuting) and renormalized the remaining weights to sum to 1.0.

Pass 4 now produces one holistic RATING (LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH) alongside the
existing VERDICT, with safety and accessibility folded in as qualitative
considerations feeding that single judgment rather than scored
separately -- not a checklist of independent numbers. New
qualitative_rating column, filterable in the results UI. Also added
domain name/description to the review prompt so the LLM judges a metric
like range against what the domain actually needs (urban_commuting:
1-50km) instead of generic real-world expectations for the platform
category -- confirmed live on a combo where phi4 had called a 396km range
"limited" by comparing to typical aircraft rather than a domain that
needs 1-50km.

Pass 2 is estimator-only now -- self.llm is never consulted there,
reserved entirely for pass 4. Restructured Pipeline.run() from combo-first
to phase-parallel: each pass now runs to completion across every combo
before the next pass starts, rather than walking each combo through all
four passes before the next combo. This surfaced a real bug: domain-
blocked combos (status stays "valid" by design, not "_fail") were
slipping past a naive status-based skip guard and getting silently
re-processed by pass 2. Fixed with a shared dead-combo check that catches
both generic failures and domain blocks correctly.

Also fixes a results-page display bug found while reviewing a live combo:
the per-metric "position" bar showed raw distance from norm_min without
inverting for lower_is_better metrics, so an excellent cost score (near
the good end) rendered as a ~0%, near-empty bar -- looked bad next to its
own 0.99 normalized score.

Validated live against phi4 (real Ollama calls, not mocked): full-domain
phase-parallel run (2,970 combos, estimator-only p2, 1.6s) followed by a
real pass-4 run (111 reviewed, 11m, 0 crashes, 0 null ratings). Two tests
that relied on the old LLM-driven pass 2 to force deterministic outcomes
were updated to test pass 4's verdict-wiring directly instead. All 100
tests pass.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-08-15 16:52:26 -05:00
parent 730a23bac3
commit 76f460499a
16 changed files with 569 additions and 403 deletions

View File

@@ -230,24 +230,37 @@ class Repository:
self.conn.commit()
return row["id"]
def backfill_lower_is_better(self, domain_name: str, metric_name: str) -> None:
"""Set lower_is_better=1 for an existing domain-metric row that still has the default 0."""
def sync_domain_metric_weights(self, domain: Domain) -> None:
"""Make domain_metric_weights exactly match domain.metric_bounds on an
already-seeded domain: upserts weight/norm_min/norm_max/unit for every
currently-declared metric, and deletes any row for a metric that's been
removed from the domain (e.g. safety/availability dropped from the
scored set). Safe to call whether the domain was just freshly inserted
or already existed.
"""
row = self.conn.execute(
"SELECT id FROM domains WHERE name = ?", (domain.name,)
).fetchone()
if not row:
return
domain_id = row["id"]
keep_ids = []
for mb in domain.metric_bounds:
metric_id = self.ensure_metric(mb.metric_name, unit=mb.unit)
keep_ids.append(metric_id)
self.conn.execute(
"""UPDATE domain_metric_weights SET lower_is_better = 1
WHERE lower_is_better = 0
AND domain_id = (SELECT id FROM domains WHERE name = ?)
AND metric_id = (SELECT id FROM metrics WHERE name = ?)""",
(domain_name, metric_name),
"""INSERT OR REPLACE INTO domain_metric_weights
(domain_id, metric_id, weight, norm_min, norm_max, lower_is_better, unit)
VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)""",
(domain_id, metric_id, mb.weight, mb.norm_min, mb.norm_max,
int(mb.lower_is_better), mb.unit),
)
self.conn.commit()
def backfill_metric_unit(self, domain_name: str, metric_name: str, unit: str) -> None:
"""Set this domain-metric row's unit — unit is domain-scoped, not global to the metric name."""
if keep_ids:
placeholders = ",".join("?" * len(keep_ids))
self.conn.execute(
"""UPDATE domain_metric_weights SET unit = ?
WHERE domain_id = (SELECT id FROM domains WHERE name = ?)
AND metric_id = (SELECT id FROM metrics WHERE name = ?)""",
(unit, domain_name, metric_name),
f"""DELETE FROM domain_metric_weights
WHERE domain_id = ? AND metric_id NOT IN ({placeholders})""",
(domain_id, *keep_ids),
)
self.conn.commit()
@@ -593,15 +606,18 @@ class Repository:
llm_review: str | None = None,
human_notes: str | None = None,
domain_block_reason: str | None = None,
qualitative_rating: str | None = None,
commit: bool = True,
) -> None:
self.conn.execute(
"""INSERT OR REPLACE INTO combination_results
(combination_id, domain_id, composite_score, novelty_flag,
llm_review, human_notes, pass_reached, domain_block_reason)
VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)""",
llm_review, human_notes, pass_reached, domain_block_reason,
qualitative_rating)
VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)""",
(combo_id, domain_id, composite_score, novelty_flag,
llm_review, human_notes, pass_reached, domain_block_reason),
llm_review, human_notes, pass_reached, domain_block_reason,
qualitative_rating),
)
if commit:
self.conn.commit()
@@ -641,6 +657,20 @@ class Repository:
).fetchall()
return {r["status"]: r["cnt"] for r in rows}
def count_results_by_rating(self, domain_name: str) -> dict[str, int]:
"""Count results by qualitative_rating (LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH) for a domain.
Rows with no rating (not yet pass-4 reviewed, or reviewed before this
existed) are excluded, not bucketed as a pseudo-status."""
rows = self.conn.execute(
"""SELECT cr.qualitative_rating as rating, COUNT(*) as cnt
FROM combination_results cr
JOIN domains d ON cr.domain_id = d.id
WHERE d.name = ? AND cr.qualitative_rating IS NOT NULL
GROUP BY cr.qualitative_rating""",
(domain_name,),
).fetchall()
return {r["rating"]: r["cnt"] for r in rows}
def get_pipeline_summary(self, domain_name: str) -> dict | None:
"""Return a summary of results for a domain, or None if no results."""
row = self.conn.execute(
@@ -685,8 +715,12 @@ class Repository:
).fetchone()
return dict(row) if row else None
def get_all_results(self, domain_name: str, status: str | None = None) -> list[dict]:
"""Return all results for a domain, optionally filtered by combo status."""
def get_all_results(
self, domain_name: str, status: str | None = None, rating: str | None = None
) -> list[dict]:
"""Return all results for a domain, optionally filtered by combo
status and/or qualitative_rating (LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH, independent filters
that combine with AND)."""
query = """SELECT cr.*, c.hash, c.status as combo_status, d.name as domain_name
FROM combination_results cr
JOIN combinations c ON cr.combination_id = c.id
@@ -698,6 +732,9 @@ class Repository:
elif status:
query += " AND c.status = ? AND cr.domain_block_reason IS NULL"
params.append(status)
if rating:
query += " AND cr.qualitative_rating = ?"
params.append(rating)
query += " ORDER BY cr.composite_score DESC"
rows = self.conn.execute(query, params).fetchall()
combo_ids = [r["combination_id"] for r in rows]
@@ -712,6 +749,7 @@ class Repository:
"pass_reached": r["pass_reached"],
"domain_id": r["domain_id"],
"domain_block_reason": r["domain_block_reason"],
"qualitative_rating": r["qualitative_rating"],
}
for r in rows
]

View File

@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS combination_results (
human_notes TEXT,
pass_reached INTEGER,
domain_block_reason TEXT,
qualitative_rating TEXT,
UNIQUE(combination_id, domain_id)
);
@@ -165,6 +166,10 @@ def _migrate(conn: sqlite3.Connection) -> None:
conn.execute(
"ALTER TABLE combination_results ADD COLUMN domain_block_reason TEXT"
)
if "qualitative_rating" not in result_cols:
conn.execute(
"ALTER TABLE combination_results ADD COLUMN qualitative_rating TEXT"
)
# Backfill: cost_efficiency is lower-is-better in all domains
conn.execute(

View File

@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ from physcom.engine.combinator import generate_combinations
from physcom.engine.constraint_resolver import ConstraintResolver, ConstraintResult
from physcom.engine.scorer import Scorer
from physcom.llm.base import LLMProvider, LLMRateLimitError
from physcom.llm.parsing import parse_rating
from physcom.models.combination import Combination, ScoredResult
from physcom.models.domain import Domain, MetricBound
@@ -385,308 +386,57 @@ class Pipeline:
# Prepare metric lookup
bounds_by_name = {mb.metric_name: mb for mb in domain.metric_bounds}
# ── Combo-first loop ─────────────────────────────────────
# Deterministic passes (1, 3, and 2 without an LLM) defer commits and
# get flushed periodically + in `finally` below -- a crash there costs
# a cheap recompute, not lost work worth committing per write. Pass 4
# (and pass 2 with an LLM) commit immediately after each call: those
# are slow and crash-prone (see the QwQ timeout saga), so that result
# is worth protecting the moment it lands.
# ── Phase-parallel: each pass runs to completion across every combo
# before the next pass starts, instead of walking each combo through
# every pass before moving to the next combo. This maximizes
# progress before the expensive/slow phase (pass 4's LLM calls) and
# keeps that phase's cost visible on its own, separate from the
# deterministic passes. It also removes any need for the two options
# to reconcile: pass 2 is estimator-only now (no LLM call in it at
# all -- self.llm is reserved for pass 4), so there's no combo that
# touches an LLM in both pass 2 and pass 4, and nothing here needs a
# live/resumed conversation across passes.
#
# Deterministic passes (1, 2, 3) defer commits and get flushed
# periodically + in `finally` below -- a crash there costs a cheap
# recompute, not lost work worth committing per write. Pass 4
# commits immediately after each call: those are slow and
# crash-prone (see the QwQ timeout saga), so that result is worth
# protecting the moment it lands.
combos_since_commit = 0
try:
for combo in combos:
self._check_cancelled(run_id)
def _tick_commit() -> None:
nonlocal combos_since_commit
combos_since_commit += 1
if combos_since_commit >= 200:
self.repo.commit()
combos_since_commit = 0
# Check existing progress for this combo in this domain
existing_pass = self.repo.get_combo_pass_reached(
combo.id, domain.id
) or 0
try:
if 1 in passes:
for combo in combos:
self._check_cancelled(run_id)
_tick_commit()
self._process_pass1(combo, domain, result, run_id)
# Load existing result to preserve human review data
existing_result = self.repo.get_existing_result(
combo.id, domain.id
if 2 in passes:
for combo in combos:
self._check_cancelled(run_id)
_tick_commit()
self._process_pass2(combo, domain, bounds_by_name, result, run_id)
if 3 in passes:
for combo in combos:
self._check_cancelled(run_id)
_tick_commit()
self._process_pass3(
combo, domain, bounds_by_name, result, score_threshold, run_id
)
# ── Pass 1: Constraint Resolution ────────────────
if 1 in passes and existing_pass < 1:
cr: ConstraintResult = self.resolver.resolve(combo)
if cr.status == "p1_fail":
combo.status = "p1_fail"
combo.block_reason = "; ".join(cr.violations)
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p1_fail", combo.block_reason, commit=False
)
# Save a result row so failed combos appear in results
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id,
domain.id,
composite_score=0.0,
pass_reached=1,
commit=False,
)
result.pass1_failed += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=1)
continue # p1_fail — skip remaining passes
else:
combo.status = "valid"
self.repo.update_combination_status(combo.id, "valid", commit=False)
# Domain constraint check (per-domain block only). combo.status
# stays "valid" here on purpose: it's domain-agnostic and the
# same combo can be blocked in this domain but valid in another.
# The per-domain block lives on combination_results.domain_block_reason
# (see count_combinations_by_status / get_all_results, which bucket on it).
if domain.constraints:
dc_result = self.resolver.check_domain_constraints(
combo, domain.constraints
)
if dc_result.status == "p1_fail":
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id,
composite_score=0.0, pass_reached=1,
domain_block_reason="; ".join(
dc_result.violations
),
commit=False,
)
result.pass1_failed += 1
self._update_run_counters(
run_id, result, current_pass=1
)
continue
if cr.status == "conditional":
result.pass1_conditional += 1
else:
result.pass1_valid += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=1)
elif 1 in passes:
# Already pass1'd — check if it failed
if combo.status.endswith("_fail"):
result.pass1_failed += 1
continue
# Check if domain-blocked from a prior run
if existing_result and existing_result["pass_reached"] == 1:
result.pass1_failed += 1
continue
result.pass1_valid += 1
else:
# Pass 1 not requested; check if failed from a prior run
if combo.status.endswith("_fail"):
result.pass1_failed += 1
continue
# ── Pass 2: Physics Estimation ───────────────────
raw_metrics: dict[str, float] = {}
if 2 in passes and existing_pass < 2:
description = _describe_combination(combo)
if self.llm:
raw_metrics = self.llm.estimate_physics(
description, domain.metric_bounds
)
else:
raw_metrics = self._stub_estimate(combo, domain.metric_bounds)
# Save raw estimates immediately (crash-safe)
estimate_dicts = []
for mname, rval in raw_metrics.items():
mb = bounds_by_name.get(mname)
if mb and mb.metric_id:
estimate_dicts.append({
"metric_id": mb.metric_id,
"raw_value": rval,
"estimation_method": "llm" if self.llm else "stub",
"confidence": 1.0,
})
# LLM-produced estimates commit immediately (slow/crash-
# prone, worth protecting); stub estimates are instant
# and defer, same as the rest of the deterministic passes.
used_llm = self.llm is not None
if estimate_dicts:
self.repo.save_raw_estimates(
combo.id, domain.id, estimate_dicts, commit=used_llm
)
# Check for all-zero estimates → p2_fail
if raw_metrics and all(v == 0.0 for v in raw_metrics.values()):
combo.status = "p2_fail"
combo.block_reason = "All metric estimates are zero"
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p2_fail", combo.block_reason, commit=used_llm
)
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id,
composite_score=0.0, pass_reached=2,
commit=used_llm,
)
result.pass2_failed += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=2)
continue
result.pass2_estimated += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=2)
elif 2 in passes:
# Already estimated — reload raw values from DB
existing_scores = self.repo.get_combination_scores(
combo.id, domain.id
)
raw_metrics = {
s["metric_name"]: s["raw_value"] for s in existing_scores
}
result.pass2_estimated += 1
else:
# Pass 2 not requested, use empty metrics
raw_metrics = {}
# ── Pass 3: Scoring & Ranking ────────────────────
if 3 in passes and existing_pass < 3:
sr = self.scorer.score_combination(combo, raw_metrics)
# Persist per-metric scores with normalized values
score_dicts = []
for s in sr.scores:
mb = bounds_by_name.get(s.metric_name)
if mb and mb.metric_id:
score_dicts.append({
"metric_id": mb.metric_id,
"raw_value": s.raw_value,
"normalized_score": s.normalized_score,
"estimation_method": s.estimation_method,
"confidence": s.confidence,
})
if score_dicts:
self.repo.save_scores(combo.id, domain.id, score_dicts, commit=False)
# Preserve existing human data
novelty_flag = (
existing_result["novelty_flag"] if existing_result else None
)
human_notes = (
existing_result["human_notes"] if existing_result else None
)
if sr.composite_score < score_threshold:
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id,
sr.composite_score, pass_reached=3,
novelty_flag=novelty_flag,
human_notes=human_notes,
commit=False,
)
combo.status = "p3_fail"
combo.block_reason = (
f"Composite score {sr.composite_score:.4f} "
f"below threshold {score_threshold}"
)
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p3_fail", combo.block_reason, commit=False
)
result.pass3_failed += 1
result.pass3_scored += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=3)
continue
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id,
domain.id,
sr.composite_score,
pass_reached=3,
novelty_flag=novelty_flag,
human_notes=human_notes,
commit=False,
)
self.repo.update_combination_status(combo.id, "scored", commit=False)
result.pass3_scored += 1
result.pass3_above_threshold += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=3)
elif 3 in passes and existing_pass >= 3:
# Already scored — count it
result.pass3_scored += 1
if existing_result and existing_result["composite_score"] is not None:
if existing_result["composite_score"] >= score_threshold:
result.pass3_above_threshold += 1
# ── Pass 4: LLM Review ───────────────────────────
if 4 in passes and self.llm:
cur_pass = self.repo.get_combo_pass_reached(
combo.id, domain.id
) or 0
if cur_pass < 4:
cur_result = self.repo.get_existing_result(
combo.id, domain.id
)
if (
cur_result
and cur_result["composite_score"] is not None
and cur_result["composite_score"] >= score_threshold
):
description = _describe_combination(combo)
db_scores = self.repo.get_combination_scores(
combo.id, domain.id
)
score_dict = {
s["metric_name"]: s["normalized_score"]
for s in db_scores
if s["normalized_score"] is not None
}
raw_dict = {
s["metric_name"]: s["raw_value"]
for s in db_scores
if s["raw_value"] is not None
}
review_result: tuple[str, bool] | None = None
try:
review_result = self.llm.review_plausibility(
description, raw_dict, score_dict, domain.metric_bounds
)
except LLMRateLimitError as exc:
self._wait_for_rate_limit(run_id, exc.retry_after)
try:
review_result = self.llm.review_plausibility(
description, raw_dict, score_dict, domain.metric_bounds
)
except LLMRateLimitError:
pass # still limited; skip, retry next run
if review_result is not None:
review_text, plausible = review_result
if not plausible:
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id,
cur_result["composite_score"],
pass_reached=4,
novelty_flag=cur_result.get("novelty_flag"),
llm_review=review_text,
human_notes=cur_result.get("human_notes"),
)
combo.status = "p4_fail"
combo.block_reason = "LLM deemed implausible"
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p4_fail", combo.block_reason
)
result.pass4_failed += 1
else:
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id,
cur_result["composite_score"],
pass_reached=4,
novelty_flag=cur_result.get("novelty_flag"),
llm_review=review_text,
human_notes=cur_result.get("human_notes"),
)
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "llm_reviewed"
)
result.pass4_reviewed += 1
self._update_run_counters(
run_id, result, current_pass=4
)
for combo in combos:
self._check_cancelled(run_id)
self._process_pass4(combo, domain, result, score_threshold, run_id)
except CancelledError:
if run_id is not None:
@@ -716,6 +466,271 @@ class Pipeline:
result.top_results = self.repo.get_top_results(domain.name, limit=20)
return result
@staticmethod
def _already_dead(combo: Combination, existing_result: dict | None) -> bool:
"""True if this combo is dead for every pass after 1 -- either a
generic failure (status ends in _fail) or a domain-specific block.
The domain-block case needs the extra existing_result check:
combo.status stays "valid" on purpose for it (domain-agnostic,
see _process_pass1's own comment on this), so pass_reached==1 with
the block already recorded is what actually marks it dead --
status alone isn't enough to catch it."""
if combo.status.endswith("_fail"):
return True
return bool(existing_result and existing_result["pass_reached"] == 1)
def _process_pass1(
self, combo: Combination, domain: Domain, result: PipelineResult, run_id: int | None
) -> None:
"""Constraint resolution for one combo. All writes deferred (commit=False)."""
existing_pass = self.repo.get_combo_pass_reached(combo.id, domain.id) or 0
if existing_pass >= 1:
if combo.status.endswith("_fail"):
result.pass1_failed += 1
return
existing_result = self.repo.get_existing_result(combo.id, domain.id)
if existing_result and existing_result["pass_reached"] == 1:
result.pass1_failed += 1
return
result.pass1_valid += 1
return
cr: ConstraintResult = self.resolver.resolve(combo)
if cr.status == "p1_fail":
combo.status = "p1_fail"
combo.block_reason = "; ".join(cr.violations)
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p1_fail", combo.block_reason, commit=False
)
# Save a result row so failed combos appear in results
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id, composite_score=0.0, pass_reached=1, commit=False
)
result.pass1_failed += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=1)
return
combo.status = "valid"
self.repo.update_combination_status(combo.id, "valid", commit=False)
# Domain constraint check (per-domain block only). combo.status stays
# "valid" here on purpose: it's domain-agnostic and the same combo can
# be blocked in this domain but valid in another. The per-domain
# block lives on combination_results.domain_block_reason (see
# count_combinations_by_status / get_all_results, which bucket on it).
if domain.constraints:
dc_result = self.resolver.check_domain_constraints(combo, domain.constraints)
if dc_result.status == "p1_fail":
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id,
composite_score=0.0, pass_reached=1,
domain_block_reason="; ".join(dc_result.violations),
commit=False,
)
result.pass1_failed += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=1)
return
if cr.status == "conditional":
result.pass1_conditional += 1
else:
result.pass1_valid += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=1)
def _process_pass2(
self,
combo: Combination,
domain: Domain,
bounds_by_name: dict[str, MetricBound],
result: PipelineResult,
run_id: int | None,
) -> None:
"""Physics estimation for one combo. Estimator-only -- self.llm is
reserved for pass 4, never consulted here. All writes deferred."""
existing_result = self.repo.get_existing_result(combo.id, domain.id)
if self._already_dead(combo, existing_result):
return
existing_pass = self.repo.get_combo_pass_reached(combo.id, domain.id) or 0
if existing_pass >= 2:
result.pass2_estimated += 1
return
raw_metrics = self._stub_estimate(combo, domain.metric_bounds)
estimate_dicts = []
for mname, rval in raw_metrics.items():
mb = bounds_by_name.get(mname)
if mb and mb.metric_id:
estimate_dicts.append({
"metric_id": mb.metric_id,
"raw_value": rval,
"estimation_method": "stub",
"confidence": 1.0,
})
if estimate_dicts:
self.repo.save_raw_estimates(combo.id, domain.id, estimate_dicts, commit=False)
# Check for all-zero estimates → p2_fail
if raw_metrics and all(v == 0.0 for v in raw_metrics.values()):
combo.status = "p2_fail"
combo.block_reason = "All metric estimates are zero"
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p2_fail", combo.block_reason, commit=False
)
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id, composite_score=0.0, pass_reached=2, commit=False
)
result.pass2_failed += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=2)
return
result.pass2_estimated += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=2)
def _process_pass3(
self,
combo: Combination,
domain: Domain,
bounds_by_name: dict[str, MetricBound],
result: PipelineResult,
score_threshold: float,
run_id: int | None,
) -> None:
"""Scoring for one combo. Reloads raw estimates from the DB (pass 2
ran as its own separate phase, not in-memory from this iteration).
All writes deferred."""
existing_result = self.repo.get_existing_result(combo.id, domain.id)
if self._already_dead(combo, existing_result):
return
existing_pass = self.repo.get_combo_pass_reached(combo.id, domain.id) or 0
if existing_pass >= 3:
result.pass3_scored += 1
if existing_result and existing_result["composite_score"] is not None:
if existing_result["composite_score"] >= score_threshold:
result.pass3_above_threshold += 1
return
existing_scores = self.repo.get_combination_scores(combo.id, domain.id)
raw_metrics = {s["metric_name"]: s["raw_value"] for s in existing_scores}
sr = self.scorer.score_combination(combo, raw_metrics)
score_dicts = []
for s in sr.scores:
mb = bounds_by_name.get(s.metric_name)
if mb and mb.metric_id:
score_dicts.append({
"metric_id": mb.metric_id,
"raw_value": s.raw_value,
"normalized_score": s.normalized_score,
"estimation_method": s.estimation_method,
"confidence": s.confidence,
})
if score_dicts:
self.repo.save_scores(combo.id, domain.id, score_dicts, commit=False)
# Preserve existing human data
novelty_flag = existing_result["novelty_flag"] if existing_result else None
human_notes = existing_result["human_notes"] if existing_result else None
if sr.composite_score < score_threshold:
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id, sr.composite_score, pass_reached=3,
novelty_flag=novelty_flag, human_notes=human_notes, commit=False,
)
combo.status = "p3_fail"
combo.block_reason = (
f"Composite score {sr.composite_score:.4f} below threshold {score_threshold}"
)
self.repo.update_combination_status(
combo.id, "p3_fail", combo.block_reason, commit=False
)
result.pass3_failed += 1
result.pass3_scored += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=3)
return
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id, sr.composite_score, pass_reached=3,
novelty_flag=novelty_flag, human_notes=human_notes, commit=False,
)
self.repo.update_combination_status(combo.id, "scored", commit=False)
result.pass3_scored += 1
result.pass3_above_threshold += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=3)
def _process_pass4(
self,
combo: Combination,
domain: Domain,
result: PipelineResult,
score_threshold: float,
run_id: int | None,
) -> None:
"""LLM plausibility review for one combo. Writes commit immediately
(default commit=True) -- slow, crash-prone calls worth protecting
the moment a result lands."""
cur_result = self.repo.get_existing_result(combo.id, domain.id)
if self._already_dead(combo, cur_result):
return
cur_pass = self.repo.get_combo_pass_reached(combo.id, domain.id) or 0
if cur_pass >= 4:
return
if not (
cur_result
and cur_result["composite_score"] is not None
and cur_result["composite_score"] >= score_threshold
):
return
description = _describe_combination(combo)
db_scores = self.repo.get_combination_scores(combo.id, domain.id)
score_dict = {
s["metric_name"]: s["normalized_score"]
for s in db_scores if s["normalized_score"] is not None
}
raw_dict = {
s["metric_name"]: s["raw_value"]
for s in db_scores if s["raw_value"] is not None
}
review_result: tuple[str, bool] | None = None
try:
review_result = self.llm.review_plausibility(
description, raw_dict, score_dict, domain
)
except LLMRateLimitError as exc:
self._wait_for_rate_limit(run_id, exc.retry_after)
try:
review_result = self.llm.review_plausibility(
description, raw_dict, score_dict, domain.metric_bounds
)
except LLMRateLimitError:
return # still limited; skip, retry next run
if review_result is None:
return
review_text, plausible = review_result
rating = parse_rating(review_text)
if not plausible:
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id, cur_result["composite_score"], pass_reached=4,
novelty_flag=cur_result.get("novelty_flag"), llm_review=review_text,
human_notes=cur_result.get("human_notes"), qualitative_rating=rating,
)
combo.status = "p4_fail"
combo.block_reason = "LLM deemed implausible"
self.repo.update_combination_status(combo.id, "p4_fail", combo.block_reason)
result.pass4_failed += 1
else:
self.repo.save_result(
combo.id, domain.id, cur_result["composite_score"], pass_reached=4,
novelty_flag=cur_result.get("novelty_flag"), llm_review=review_text,
human_notes=cur_result.get("human_notes"), qualitative_rating=rating,
)
self.repo.update_combination_status(combo.id, "llm_reviewed")
result.pass4_reviewed += 1
self._update_run_counters(run_id, result, current_pass=4)
def _wait_for_rate_limit(self, run_id: int | None, retry_after: int) -> None:
"""Mark run rate_limited, sleep with cancel checks, then resume."""
if run_id is not None:

View File

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ from __future__ import annotations
from abc import ABC, abstractmethod
from physcom.models.domain import MetricBound
from physcom.models.domain import Domain, MetricBound
class LLMRateLimitError(Exception):
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ class LLMProvider(ABC):
combination_description: str,
raw_metrics: dict[str, float],
normalized_scores: dict[str, float],
metrics: list[MetricBound],
domain: Domain,
) -> tuple[str, bool]:
"""Given a combination, its raw physical estimates, and their
normalized scores, return a (text, is_plausible) tuple:
@@ -50,6 +50,11 @@ class LLMProvider(ABC):
normalized score) so the review can reason from the actual physics
rather than only a compressed 0-1 number, which can look
deceptively bad for a metric whose scale was built for a different
kind of vehicle. `metrics` carries each metric's unit for
formatting the raw value meaningfully."""
kind of vehicle. `domain` carries both each metric's unit (via
domain.metric_bounds, for formatting the raw value meaningfully)
and the domain's own name/description, so the review judges a
metric like range against what THIS domain actually needs rather
than generic real-world expectations for the platform category
(e.g. a short-hop domain shouldn't get judged against typical
long-haul aircraft range)."""
...

View File

@@ -16,6 +16,13 @@ def parse_verdict(text: str) -> bool:
return True
def parse_rating(text: str) -> str | None:
"""Extract RATING: LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH from response; None if absent (older
reviews saved before this existed, or a malformed response)."""
m = re.search(r"RATING:\s*(LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH)", text, re.IGNORECASE)
return m.group(1).upper() if m else None
def parse_metric_json(text: str, metrics: list[MetricBound]) -> dict[str, float]:
"""Strip markdown fences and parse JSON; fall back to each metric's own
norm_min/norm_max midpoint on error — a flat constant like 0.5 is

View File

@@ -116,6 +116,14 @@ You are reviewing a transportation concept for real-world viability — could th
actually be built and operated safely. Whether it is new, exciting, or original
is NOT the question.
## Domain
This concept is being evaluated for "{domain_name}": {domain_description}
Judge every metric against what THIS domain actually needs, not general
expectations for the platform category. A range far beyond what this domain
requires is a strength or a non-issue, never a weakness -- don't reason about
range, speed, or capacity by comparing to what other vehicles of this type
typically have in general use; compare to what this specific domain calls for.
## Concept
{description}
@@ -139,6 +147,14 @@ before treating the score as evidence of a problem.
{scores}
Safety and accessibility (infrastructure/regulatory availability) are NOT
among the scores above — neither reduces to a physics formula the way the
metrics above do, so nothing here estimates them numerically. Reason about
both directly from the concept description: does this combination carry a
specific safety hazard, and is the infrastructure/regulatory environment it
needs realistic? Both feed into the RATING below as qualitative judgment
calls, not as scores of their own.
## What makes something IMPLAUSIBLE
Mark IMPLAUSIBLE if either of these is true:
- It is physically or engineering-wise impossible given the components
@@ -150,15 +166,13 @@ Mark IMPLAUSIBLE if either of these is true:
fatiguing a hull over time is a real structural risk, not just "explosives
are dangerous in general"; a fuel that's fine in the open becoming
concentrated in a sealed tube is a real risk, not just "fuel is
flammable"). A low given safety score is a signal the pipeline already
found something concerning — treat it as evidence, not noise to explain
away.
flammable").
- Or: a real regulatory/infrastructure barrier with no plausible workaround.
None of these make something implausible on their own:
- being unoriginal or something like it already exists
- being expensive, slow, or short-range
- a single mediocre score on one metric that isn't safety-related
- a single mediocre score on one metric
Most concepts that reach this review are ordinary and workable; reserve
IMPLAUSIBLE for a real, specific problem you can name — but don't require
@@ -167,14 +181,26 @@ Reason from the physics and engineering actually described here, not from
whether something like it already exists — novelty or lack of it is not
evidence either way.
## Overall Rating
Separately from the plausibility verdict, give ONE holistic rating —
LOW, MEDIUM, or HIGH — for how good this combination is overall. This is a
single combined judgment, not a separate score per attribute: weigh the
metric scores above together with your own qualitative read on safety and
accessibility into one rating, the way a person sizing up the whole concept
would, not a checklist of independent numbers.
## What to write
In 2-4 sentences, give your reasoning, then check it against the scores
above: if your reasoning conflicts with a score (e.g. you believe this is
hazardous but its safety score is high), name the metric and say so
above: if your reasoning conflicts with a score (e.g. you believe cost is
a serious problem but its cost score is high), name the metric and say so
explicitly — don't silently contradict a given score.
Finish with exactly one line:
Finish with exactly two lines. For the first, pick exactly one:
RATING: LOW
RATING: MEDIUM
RATING: HIGH
Then, for the second, pick exactly one:
VERDICT: PLAUSIBLE
or
VERDICT: IMPLAUSIBLE
"""

View File

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ from physcom.llm.prompts import (
format_metrics_for_prompt,
format_scores_for_prompt,
)
from physcom.models.domain import MetricBound
from physcom.models.domain import Domain, MetricBound
class GeminiLLMProvider(LLMProvider):
@@ -51,12 +51,14 @@ class GeminiLLMProvider(LLMProvider):
combination_description: str,
raw_metrics: dict[str, float],
normalized_scores: dict[str, float],
metrics: list[MetricBound],
domain: Domain,
) -> tuple[str, bool]:
scores_str = format_scores_for_prompt(raw_metrics, normalized_scores, metrics)
scores_str = format_scores_for_prompt(raw_metrics, normalized_scores, domain.metric_bounds)
prompt = PLAUSIBILITY_REVIEW_PROMPT.format(
description=combination_description,
scores=scores_str,
domain_name=domain.name,
domain_description=domain.description,
)
try:
response = self._client.models.generate_content(

View File

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
from __future__ import annotations
from physcom.llm.base import LLMProvider
from physcom.models.domain import MetricBound
from physcom.models.domain import Domain, MetricBound
class MockLLMProvider(LLMProvider):
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ class MockLLMProvider(LLMProvider):
combination_description: str,
raw_metrics: dict[str, float],
normalized_scores: dict[str, float],
metrics: list[MetricBound],
domain: Domain,
) -> tuple[str, bool]:
avg = sum(normalized_scores.values()) / max(len(normalized_scores), 1)
if avg > 0.5:

View File

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ from physcom.llm.prompts import (
format_metrics_for_prompt,
format_scores_for_prompt,
)
from physcom.models.domain import MetricBound
from physcom.models.domain import Domain, MetricBound
class OllamaLLMProvider(LLMProvider):
@@ -39,12 +39,14 @@ class OllamaLLMProvider(LLMProvider):
combination_description: str,
raw_metrics: dict[str, float],
normalized_scores: dict[str, float],
metrics: list[MetricBound],
domain: Domain,
) -> tuple[str, bool]:
scores_str = format_scores_for_prompt(raw_metrics, normalized_scores, metrics)
scores_str = format_scores_for_prompt(raw_metrics, normalized_scores, domain.metric_bounds)
prompt = PLAUSIBILITY_REVIEW_PROMPT.format(
description=combination_description,
scores=scores_str,
domain_name=domain.name,
domain_description=domain.description,
)
text = self._generate(prompt, json_mode=False).strip()
return (text, parse_verdict(text))

View File

@@ -728,11 +728,22 @@ URBAN_COMMUTING = Domain(
name="urban_commuting",
description="Daily travel within a city, 1-50km range",
metric_bounds=[
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.25, norm_min=1, norm_max=2000, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.25, norm_min=1e-5, norm_max=2e-3, unit="$/m", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("safety", weight=0.25, norm_min=0.0, norm_max=1.0, unit="0-1"),
MetricBound("availability", weight=0.15, norm_min=0.0, norm_max=1.0, unit="0-1"),
MetricBound("range_fuel", weight=0.10, norm_min=5000, norm_max=500000, unit="m"),
# safety and availability removed from the scored/weighted metric set:
# both are judgment calls (risk assessment, infrastructure prevalence),
# not physics quantities with a formula, and running them through the
# same log-normalize() built for physical quantities produced
# incoherent results (a safety raw value already declared as "0-1"
# getting re-normalized into a different, unexplainable 0-1 number --
# see combo 1540's review, where phi4 could only cite the post-
# normalization number with no way to justify it). Safety is now a
# qualitative consideration folded into pass 4's holistic RATING
# instead. Availability needs real per-infrastructure-type research
# this project hasn't done -- not scored anywhere for now rather than
# pretend a quick formula or an equally uninformed LLM guess settles it.
# Weights renormalized to sum to 1.0 across the remaining metrics.
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.4167, norm_min=1, norm_max=2000, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.4167, norm_min=1e-5, norm_max=2e-3, unit="$/m", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("range_fuel", weight=0.1666, norm_min=5000, norm_max=500000, unit="m"),
],
constraints=[DomainConstraint("medium", ["ground", "air"])],
)
@@ -741,11 +752,12 @@ INTERPLANETARY = Domain(
name="interplanetary_travel",
description="Travel between planets within a solar system",
metric_bounds=[
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.30, norm_min=10, norm_max=10000, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("range_fuel", weight=0.30, norm_min=1e9, norm_max=1e13, unit="m"),
MetricBound("safety", weight=0.20, norm_min=0.0, norm_max=1.0, unit="0-1"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.10, norm_min=1.0, norm_max=1e6, unit="$/m", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("range_degradation", weight=0.10, norm_min=8640000, norm_max=3.1536e9, unit="s"),
# safety removed -- see URBAN_COMMUTING comment above. Weights
# renormalized across the remaining metrics.
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.375, norm_min=10, norm_max=10000, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("range_fuel", weight=0.375, norm_min=1e9, norm_max=1e13, unit="m"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.125, norm_min=1.0, norm_max=1e6, unit="$/m", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("range_degradation", weight=0.125, norm_min=8640000, norm_max=3.1536e9, unit="s"),
],
constraints=[DomainConstraint("medium", ["space"])],
)
@@ -754,11 +766,12 @@ MARITIME_SHIPPING = Domain(
name="maritime_shipping",
description="Ocean cargo transport between ports, 100-40000km range",
metric_bounds=[
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.15, norm_min=1, norm_max=1000, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("cargo_capacity", weight=0.25, norm_min=1000, norm_max=2e8, unit="kg"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.25, norm_min=1e-9, norm_max=1e-6, unit="$/(kg\u00b7m)", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("safety", weight=0.20, norm_min=0.0, norm_max=1.0, unit="0-1"),
MetricBound("range_fuel", weight=0.15, norm_min=100000, norm_max=40000000, unit="m"),
# safety removed -- see URBAN_COMMUTING comment above. Weights
# renormalized across the remaining metrics.
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.1875, norm_min=1, norm_max=1000, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("cargo_capacity", weight=0.3125, norm_min=1000, norm_max=2e8, unit="kg"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.3125, norm_min=1e-9, norm_max=1e-6, unit="$/(kg\u00b7m)", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("range_fuel", weight=0.1875, norm_min=100000, norm_max=40000000, unit="m"),
],
constraints=[DomainConstraint("medium", ["water"])],
)
@@ -767,11 +780,12 @@ LAST_MILE_DELIVERY = Domain(
name="last_mile_delivery",
description="Short-range package delivery within neighborhoods, 0.5-15km",
metric_bounds=[
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.25, norm_min=1, norm_max=500, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.30, norm_min=1e-5, norm_max=5e-3, unit="$/m", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("cargo_capacity_kg", weight=0.20, norm_min=1, norm_max=500, unit="kg"),
MetricBound("safety", weight=0.15, norm_min=0.0, norm_max=1.0, unit="0-1"),
MetricBound("environmental_impact", weight=0.10, norm_min=0, norm_max=5e-4, unit="kg/m", lower_is_better=True),
# safety removed -- see URBAN_COMMUTING comment above. Weights
# renormalized across the remaining metrics.
MetricBound("power_density", weight=0.2941, norm_min=1, norm_max=500, unit="W/kg"),
MetricBound("cost_efficiency", weight=0.3529, norm_min=1e-5, norm_max=5e-3, unit="$/m", lower_is_better=True),
MetricBound("cargo_capacity_kg", weight=0.2353, norm_min=1, norm_max=500, unit="kg"),
MetricBound("environmental_impact", weight=0.1177, norm_min=0, norm_max=5e-4, unit="kg/m", lower_is_better=True),
],
constraints=[DomainConstraint("medium", ["ground", "air"])],
)
@@ -839,12 +853,11 @@ def load_transport_seed(repo) -> dict:
counts["domains"] += 1
except sqlite3.IntegrityError:
pass
# Backfill metric units and lower_is_better on existing DBs.
for mb in domain.metric_bounds:
repo.ensure_metric(mb.metric_name, unit=mb.unit)
repo.backfill_metric_unit(domain.name, mb.metric_name, mb.unit)
if mb.lower_is_better:
repo.backfill_lower_is_better(domain.name, mb.metric_name)
# Sync domain_metric_weights to exactly match this domain's current
# metric_bounds on existing DBs -- upserts weight/norm_min/norm_max/
# unit for current metrics and removes any that were dropped (e.g.
# safety/availability no longer scored).
repo.sync_domain_metric_weights(domain)
# Backfill domain constraints
repo.replace_domain_constraints(domain)

View File

@@ -25,9 +25,11 @@ def results_domain(domain_name: str):
return redirect(url_for("results.results_index"))
status_filter = request.args.get("status")
results = repo.get_all_results(domain_name, status=status_filter)
rating_filter = request.args.get("rating")
results = repo.get_all_results(domain_name, status=status_filter, rating=rating_filter)
# Domain-scoped status counts (only combos that have results in this domain)
statuses = repo.count_combinations_by_status(domain_name=domain_name)
ratings = repo.count_results_by_rating(domain_name)
return render_template(
"results/list.html",
@@ -35,7 +37,9 @@ def results_domain(domain_name: str):
domain=domain,
results=results,
status_filter=status_filter,
rating_filter=rating_filter,
statuses=statuses,
ratings=ratings,
total_results=sum(statuses.values()),
)
@@ -101,6 +105,7 @@ def submit_review(domain_name: str, combo_id: int):
novelty_flag=novelty_flag,
llm_review=existing.get("llm_review") if existing else None,
human_notes=human_notes,
qualitative_rating=existing.get("qualitative_rating") if existing else None,
)
repo.update_combination_status(combo_id, "reviewed")

View File

@@ -214,6 +214,9 @@ table.compact th, table.compact td { padding: 0.25rem 0.4rem; font-size: 0.83rem
.badge-llm_reviewed { background: rgba(107,163,160,0.12); color: var(--accent-teal); border-color: rgba(107,163,160,0.25); }
.badge-reviewed { background: rgba(155,142,196,0.12); color: var(--accent-violet); border-color: rgba(155,142,196,0.25); }
.badge-pending { background: rgba(184,147,92,0.12); color: var(--accent-amber); border-color: rgba(184,147,92,0.25); }
.badge-rating-low { background: rgba(184,92,92,0.12); color: var(--accent-red); border-color: rgba(184,92,92,0.25); }
.badge-rating-medium { background: rgba(184,147,92,0.12); color: var(--accent-amber); border-color: rgba(184,147,92,0.25); }
.badge-rating-high { background: rgba(122,171,138,0.12); color: var(--accent-green); border-color: rgba(122,171,138,0.25); }
/* ── Buttons ─────────────────────────────────────────────── */
.btn {

View File

@@ -50,12 +50,13 @@
<div class="step-body">
<h3>Physics Estimation</h3>
<p>
Surviving combinations get raw metric estimates &mdash; speed, cost,
safety, range &mdash; via heuristic stubs or an LLM provider that
reasons about the physical properties of each pairing.
Surviving combinations get raw metric estimates &mdash; power
density, cost, range &mdash; from a deterministic physics engine
that sizes each combination from its own declared attributes, not
a guess.
</p>
<div class="step-example">
Bicycle + Human Pedalling &rarr; speed: 20 km/h, cost: $0.01/km
Bicycle + Human Muscle &rarr; power density: 4.4 W/kg, range: 500km
</div>
</div>
</div>
@@ -72,8 +73,8 @@
Combinations are ranked within their domain.
</p>
<div class="step-example">
Domain <code>urban_commuting</code> weights: speed 25%, cost 25%,
safety 25%, availability 15%, range 10%
Domain <code>urban_commuting</code> weights: power density 42%,
cost 42%, range 17%
</div>
</div>
</div>
@@ -85,9 +86,11 @@
<div class="step-body">
<h3>LLM Review</h3>
<p>
Top-scoring combinations are sent to a language model for plausibility
and novelty assessment &mdash; catching physically valid but practically
absurd pairings.
Top-scoring combinations are sent to a language model for a
plausibility verdict plus a holistic LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH rating &mdash;
weighing safety and accessibility as qualitative judgment calls
alongside the physics scores, catching physically valid but
practically absurd pairings.
</p>
<div class="step-example">
"Train + Solar Sail: structurally valid constraints, but solar radiation
@@ -163,14 +166,15 @@
<div class="card concept-card">
<h3>Metrics</h3>
<p>
Quantitative axes like speed, cost, safety, and range. Each metric
has a domain-specific weight and normalization range. Some are
inverted &mdash; lower cost is better.
Quantitative physics axes like power density, cost, and range. Each
metric has a domain-specific weight and normalization range. Some
are inverted &mdash; lower cost is better. Safety and accessibility
are judgment calls, not physics quantities &mdash; they're weighed
qualitatively in the LLM review pass instead of scored here.
</p>
<div class="concept-examples">
<span class="badge">speed</span>
<span class="badge">power_density</span>
<span class="badge">cost_efficiency</span>
<span class="badge">safety</span>
<span class="badge">range_fuel</span>
</div>
</div>

View File

@@ -27,6 +27,9 @@
{% if result %}
<dt>Composite Score</dt><dd class="score-cell">{{ "%.4f"|format(result.composite_score) }}</dd>
<dt>Pass Reached</dt><dd>{{ result.pass_reached }}</dd>
{% if result.qualitative_rating %}
<dt>Rating</dt><dd><span class="badge badge-rating-{{ result.qualitative_rating|lower }}">{{ result.qualitative_rating }}</span></dd>
{% endif %}
{% if result.novelty_flag %}
<dt>Novelty</dt><dd>{{ result.novelty_flag }}</dd>
{% endif %}
@@ -102,11 +105,16 @@
{%- elif s.raw_value >= mb.norm_max -%}
<span class="badge badge-{{ 'p1_fail' if mb.lower_is_better else 'valid' }}">at/above max{{ ' (worst)' if mb.lower_is_better else '' }}</span>
{%- else -%}
{% set pct = ((s.raw_value - mb.norm_min) / (mb.norm_max - mb.norm_min) * 100) | int %}
{% set raw_pct = (s.raw_value - mb.norm_min) / (mb.norm_max - mb.norm_min) * 100 %}
{# For lower_is_better metrics, raw_pct alone measures distance from norm_min,
not quality -- a value near norm_min (excellent, cost near its floor) would
otherwise render as a near-empty bar. Invert so the bar and percentage always
mean "how good", matching the normalized score's own higher-is-better convention. #}
{% set pct = ((100 - raw_pct) if mb.lower_is_better else raw_pct) | int %}
<div class="metric-bar-container">
<div class="metric-bar" style="width: {{ pct }}%"></div>
</div>
<span class="metric-bar-label">~{{ pct }}%{{ ' ' if mb.lower_is_better else '' }}</span>
<span class="metric-bar-label">~{{ pct }}%{{ ' (lower is better)' if mb.lower_is_better else '' }}</span>
{%- endif -%}
{%- else -%}

View File

@@ -26,11 +26,11 @@
{% if statuses %}
<div class="filter-row">
<span>Filter:</span>
<a href="{{ url_for('results.results_domain', domain_name=domain.name) }}"
<span>Status:</span>
<a href="{{ url_for('results.results_domain', domain_name=domain.name, rating=rating_filter) }}"
class="btn btn-sm {{ '' if status_filter else 'btn-primary' }}">All ({{ total_results }})</a>
{% for s, cnt in statuses.items() %}
<a href="{{ url_for('results.results_domain', domain_name=domain.name, status=s) }}"
<a href="{{ url_for('results.results_domain', domain_name=domain.name, status=s, rating=rating_filter) }}"
class="btn btn-sm {{ 'btn-primary' if status_filter == s else '' }}">
{{ s }} ({{ cnt }})
</a>
@@ -38,9 +38,25 @@
</div>
{% endif %}
{% if ratings %}
<div class="filter-row">
<span>Rating:</span>
<a href="{{ url_for('results.results_domain', domain_name=domain.name, status=status_filter) }}"
class="btn btn-sm {{ '' if not rating_filter else 'btn-primary' }}">All</a>
{% for rt in ['HIGH', 'MEDIUM', 'LOW'] %}
{% if rt in ratings %}
<a href="{{ url_for('results.results_domain', domain_name=domain.name, status=status_filter, rating=rt) }}"
class="btn btn-sm {{ 'btn-primary' if rating_filter == rt else '' }}">
{{ rt }} ({{ ratings[rt] }})
</a>
{% endif %}
{% endfor %}
</div>
{% endif %}
{% if not results %}
{% if status_filter %}
<p class="empty">No results with status "{{ status_filter }}" in this domain.</p>
{% if status_filter or rating_filter %}
<p class="empty">No results matching that filter in this domain.</p>
{% else %}
<p class="empty">No results for this domain yet. <a href="{{ url_for('pipeline.pipeline_form') }}">Run the pipeline</a> first.</p>
{% endif %}
@@ -52,6 +68,7 @@
<th>Score</th>
<th>Entities</th>
<th>Status</th>
<th>Rating</th>
<th>Details</th>
<th></th>
</tr>
@@ -69,6 +86,13 @@
<span class="badge badge-{{ r.combination.status }}">{{ r.combination.status }}</span>
{%- endif -%}
</td>
<td>
{%- if r.qualitative_rating -%}
<span class="badge badge-rating-{{ r.qualitative_rating|lower }}">{{ r.qualitative_rating }}</span>
{%- else -%}
{%- endif -%}
</td>
<td class="block-reason-cell">
{%- if r.domain_block_reason -%}
{{ r.domain_block_reason }}

View File

@@ -335,28 +335,34 @@ def test_p3_fail_below_threshold(seeded_repo):
def test_p4_fail_implausible(seeded_repo):
"""Combos deemed implausible by LLM should get p4_fail status."""
"""Combos deemed implausible by LLM should get p4_fail status.
Pass 2 is estimator-only now (never calls the LLM), so there's no way
to force every combo's raw estimates toward a controlled low/high value
the way MockLLMProvider's default_estimates used to. Force the pass-4
verdict directly instead -- what's under test here is pipeline.py's
wiring of review_plausibility's return value to status/counters, not
MockLLMProvider's avg-based heuristic.
"""
from physcom.llm.providers.mock import MockLLMProvider
class AlwaysImplausibleLLM(MockLLMProvider):
def review_plausibility(self, description, raw_metrics, normalized_scores, domain):
return ("Always implausible for testing.", False)
repo = seeded_repo
domain = repo.get_domain("urban_commuting")
resolver = ConstraintResolver()
scorer = Scorer(domain)
# Low estimates → normalized scores avg <= 0.5 → MockLLMProvider returns (text, False)
# Use threshold=0.0 so no combo gets p3_fail and all reach pass 4
mock_llm = MockLLMProvider(default_estimates={
"power_density": 0.1, "cost_efficiency": 0.1, "safety": 0.1,
"availability": 0.1, "range_fuel": 0.1,
})
pipeline = Pipeline(repo, resolver, scorer, llm=mock_llm)
pipeline = Pipeline(repo, resolver, scorer, llm=AlwaysImplausibleLLM())
result = pipeline.run(
domain, ["platform", "actuator", "energy_storage"],
score_threshold=0.0, passes=[1, 2, 3, 4],
)
# With low normalized scores (avg <= 0.5), reviewed combos should be p4_fail
assert result.pass4_failed > 0
assert result.pass4_reviewed == 0
@@ -367,20 +373,23 @@ def test_p4_fail_implausible(seeded_repo):
def test_p4_pass_plausible(seeded_repo):
"""Combos deemed plausible by LLM should get llm_reviewed status."""
"""Combos deemed plausible by LLM should get llm_reviewed status.
See test_p4_fail_implausible on why the verdict is forced directly
rather than via controlled pass-2 estimates.
"""
from physcom.llm.providers.mock import MockLLMProvider
class AlwaysPlausibleLLM(MockLLMProvider):
def review_plausibility(self, description, raw_metrics, normalized_scores, domain):
return ("Always plausible for testing.", True)
repo = seeded_repo
domain = repo.get_domain("urban_commuting")
resolver = ConstraintResolver()
scorer = Scorer(domain)
# High estimates → avg > 0.5 → MockLLMProvider returns (text, True)
mock_llm = MockLLMProvider(default_estimates={
"power_density": 500.0, "cost_efficiency": 5e-4, "safety": 0.6,
"availability": 0.7, "range_fuel": 200000.0,
})
pipeline = Pipeline(repo, resolver, scorer, llm=mock_llm)
pipeline = Pipeline(repo, resolver, scorer, llm=AlwaysPlausibleLLM())
result = pipeline.run(
domain, ["platform", "actuator", "energy_storage"],