Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.56863% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 97.61%. Comparing base (63b53e3) to head (e249df3).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #742      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.63%   97.61%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         439      441       +2     
  Lines       54251    54455     +204     
==========================================
+ Hits        52968    53158     +190     
- Misses       1283     1297      +14     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Implementation Summary

Changes

• Added RootedTreeArrangement as a new graph satisfaction model with parent-array plus permutation encoding, brute-force solver registration, canonical example metadata, and focused unit tests.
• Wired the model into the crate exports, CLI pred create direct/random flows, CLI help, and a regression test for pred create RootedTreeArrangement.
• Added a paper problem-def entry plus bibliography entries for Gavril (1977) and Adolphson-Hu (1973).

Deviations from Plan

• The canonical example used for example-db and the paper is a 4-vertex triangle-plus-tail instance instead of the issue's 5-vertex Example 2. This keeps the search space under the repo's example-db brute-force optimality threshold while preserving the same rooted-tree-arrangement structure.

Open Questions

• None.

Agentic Review Report

Structural Check

Structural Review: model RootedTreeArrangement

Structural Completeness

Build Status

• make test: PASS
• make clippy: PASS

Semantic Review

• evaluate() correctness: OK — the implementation rejects invalid parent arrays, invalid permutations, non-ancestor-comparable mapped edges, and over-bound embeddings before returning true.
• dims() correctness: OK — the encoding is 2n variables over [0, n), matching the stated parent-array plus permutation representation.
• Size getter consistency: OK — num_vertices() / num_edges() exist and match the names used by metadata and exported schema.
• Complexity metadata: ISSUE — declare_variants! advertises 2^num_vertices at src/models/graph/rooted_tree_arrangement.rs:209, but the only implemented exact solver path is brute force over dims() = vec![n; 2*n] at src/models/graph/rooted_tree_arrangement.rs:109, i.e. an n^(2n) search space. The catalog now understates the implemented complexity.

Issue Compliance

Summary

• 17/18 structural checks passed.
• 8/8 issue compliance checks passed.
• FAIL / ISSUE items:
• Deterministic whitelist failed because the PR includes CLI / crate-export wiring outside the model-PR whitelist.
• Complexity metadata understates the implemented brute-force search space (2^n reported vs n^(2n) encoded).

Quality Check

Quality Review

Design Principles

• DRY: OK — the model-specific logic is centralized in src/models/graph/rooted_tree_arrangement.rs, and the CLI changes follow the existing create-branch pattern used by neighboring graph models.
• KISS: OK — parent-array + permutation is the minimal encoding that fits the repo’s Problem / BruteForce architecture.
• HC/LC: OK — model logic, CLI wiring, tests, and paper text remain separated cleanly by module.

HCI (CLI changed)

• Error messages: OK — missing --bound is reported with a specific, actionable message in problemreductions-cli/src/commands/create.rs:2931.
• Discoverability: OK — pred list and pred show RootedTreeArrangement expose the new model correctly.
• Consistency: OK — direct and random create flows mirror the existing OptimalLinearArrangement UX.
• Least surprise: ISSUE — the shipped paper command block uses bare pred solve rooted-tree-arrangement.json (docs/paper/reductions.typ:1764), but the model has no ILP path, so the default solver fails on the canonical example.
• Feedback: OK — create/evaluate output is clear and machine-readable.

Test Quality

• Naive test detection: ISSUE
  • problemreductions-cli/tests/cli_tests.rs:3012 only checks JSON creation for pred create RootedTreeArrangement; there is no CLI regression for pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement plus solving the example. That gap allowed the broken canonical pred solve command to ship.

Issues

Critical (Must Fix)

• None.

Important (Should Fix)

• Canonical user path is broken: pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement works, but pred solve <example> fails with No reduction path from RootedTreeArrangement to ILP...; users must discover --solver brute-force themselves. The paper currently documents the failing command at docs/paper/reductions.typ:1765-1767.
• Complexity metadata is inaccurate: pred list / pred show now advertise O(2^num_vertices) from src/models/graph/rooted_tree_arrangement.rs:209, even though the implementation’s encoded brute-force space is n^(2n) via src/models/graph/rooted_tree_arrangement.rs:109-111.

Minor (Nice to Have)

• The deterministic model-PR whitelist fails because this PR also updates CLI/crate-export files. That may be intentional, but it reduces the signal of the whitelist gate.

Summary

• The code structure is solid and the CLI create flows work, but the canonical solve command is wrong for the shipped example.
• The new model’s registry complexity metadata is materially optimistic relative to the implementation.
• CLI coverage is too narrow to catch the broken example solve path.

Agentic Feature Tests

Feature Test Report: problem-reductions

Date: 2026-03-22
Project type: CLI + Rust library
Features tested: RootedTreeArrangement
Profile: ephemeral
Use Case: Discover the new model from the catalog, materialize its canonical example, solve it from the documented command path, and verify the witness from the CLI alone.
Expected Outcome: pred list / pred show should surface the model, pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement should create a valid instance, and the documented pred solve rooted-tree-arrangement.json path should solve that example successfully.
Verdict: fail
Critical Issues: 0

Summary

Per-Feature Details

RootedTreeArrangement

• Role: downstream CLI user validating the new model from docs/examples.
• Use Case: inspect the model, create its canonical example, solve it, and verify the published witness.
• What they tried: pred list, pred show RootedTreeArrangement, pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement -o /tmp/.../example.json, pred solve /tmp/.../example.json, pred evaluate /tmp/.../example.json --config 0,0,1,2,0,1,2,3, pred solve /tmp/.../example.json --solver brute-force, direct pred create RootedTreeArrangement ..., and random pred create RootedTreeArrangement --random ....
• Discoverability: Good. The model appears in pred list, and pred show prints fields and complexity metadata.
• Setup: Worked. Building/installing pred from the PR worktree succeeded.
• Functionality: Partial. pred create --example, direct create, random create, pred evaluate, and pred solve --solver brute-force all worked. Bare pred solve on the canonical example failed.
• Expected vs Actual Outcome: Expected the paper’s canonical pred solve rooted-tree-arrangement.json command to work as written. Actual behavior requires --solver brute-force because pred path RootedTreeArrangement ILP reports no reduction path.
• Blocked steps: None.
• Friction points: The default-solver failure is surprising because the shipped paper command omits the required solver flag.
• Doc suggestions: Update the paper command block (and any other shipped examples) to use pred solve ... --solver brute-force, or add an ILP-capable reduction path before documenting bare pred solve.

Expected vs Actual Outcome

• pred list: expected yes, actual yes.
• pred show RootedTreeArrangement: expected yes, actual yes.
• pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement: expected yes, actual yes.
• pred solve <example>: expected yes, actual no — failed with No reduction path from RootedTreeArrangement to ILP or ILP solver found no solution. Try \--solver brute-force`.`
• pred solve <example> --solver brute-force: expected yes, actual yes.
• pred evaluate <example> --config 0,0,1,2,0,1,2,3: expected yes, actual yes.

Issues Found

• Confirmed — Important: The documented canonical solve path is broken. Reproduced with pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement followed by pred solve <file>; the model has no ILP reduction path.
• Confirmed — Minor: pred list / pred show expose O(2^num_vertices), which does not match the only implemented brute-force encoding.

Suggestions

• Add a CLI regression that exercises pred create --example RootedTreeArrangement plus solving the example.
• Change the shipped pred solve examples for RootedTreeArrangement to --solver brute-force, unless an ILP reduction path is added.
• Fix the declared complexity metadata to reflect the implemented search space, or implement and document a real 2^n-style exact algorithm.

Generated by review-pipeline