Unit 8 (cost-dynamics): split criterion 2 (MEDIUM, preserve-by-default)#167
Conversation
…-default) Per docs/RUBRIC_AUDIT.md (MEDIUM): old c2 bundled 'names a concrete failure mode' with 'explains the mechanism.' Splits into name-the-failure-mode c2 and a new c3 (explain the mechanism); renumbers regime distinction to position 4. Rubric grows 3 -> 4. Preserve-by-default: faithful decomposition of locked Opus values (old-c2=T -> c2=T,c3=T). p007 is the lone c2=T/c3=F differential (names single-axis failures without the mechanism; c1 also false on the missing annualization anchor); p009/p011 name no failure mode -> c2=F,c3=F. No realignments. c4 (regime) carries old-c3 unchanged. Updated p007/p011 labels for the 4-criterion shape. Gate-exempt (faithful split, zero realignments per docs/REGRESSION_GATE.md). Local lint, schema check, ingest-check, pytest all pass.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Update pair label to match four-criterion expectations
After the rubric was split to four criteria, this label now contradicts the actual expected vector for the same pair (c3 is marked true below, while c4 is false). This kind of stale label makes calibration/debug workflows unreliable for anyone triaging by label text (including scripts or manual audits), because the descriptive class no longer matches the ground truth in expected.criteria; the affected labels should be renumbered to the new c1–c4 semantics.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Codex on PR #167: after the c2 split, several pair labels still referenced the old 3-criterion numbering and contradicted their expected vectors. Fixed: * p006: 'c1+c2 met, c3 missing' -> 'c1+c2+c3 met, c4 missing' (T,T,T,F) * p008: 'c2+c3 met, c1 missing' -> 'c2+c3+c4 met, c1 missing' (F,T,T,T) * p010: 'c2 only' -> 'c2+c3 met, c1/c4 missing' (F,T,T,F) * 'All three met' -> 'All four met' (cosmetic, 4 criteria now) Expected values unchanged; only labels corrected.
|
@codex Fixed in 0199ff4. Renumbered the stale labels to 4-criterion semantics: p006 → "c1+c2+c3 met, c4 missing" (T,T,T,F), p008 → "c2+c3+c4 met, c1 missing" (F,T,T,T), p010 → "c2+c3 met, c1/c4 missing" (F,T,T,F), and "All three met" → "All four met". Expected values unchanged. Good catch on the systematic angle — when each unit was split I updated the differential/renamed pair labels but left ordinary partial-credit labels on old numbering. The same pattern exists in already-merged units (2–7, 10–12) and pending #168 (Unit 9); I'm doing a dedicated label-reconciliation pass for those rather than leaving them stale. Generated by Claude Code |
|
Thanks for the update — this looks resolved. Given your trigger and the PR context, no further Codex action is needed right now:
I did not make additional code changes, create a commit, or open a follow-up PR from this run. |
The first draft claimed units 8 and 9 still carried a bundled c2. That was read off a stale working tree from before a git pull — PRs #167 and #168 had already split both (rubric + regression sets to 4 criteria) and merged. Remove the false "incomplete sweep" section, fix the numbering note (only tokenization and the reverted multimodal remain 3-criterion), and correct the regime-criterion index for units 8/9 from c3 to c4. The c1 and regime-criterion analysis for 8/9 is unchanged — the split left their c1 text alone and only renumbered the regime criterion. https://claude.ai/code/session_019xEvNkByf5ic4kbMZFdKDR
2 participants
Summary
Unit 8 (
cost-dynamics), seventh of the MEDIUM batch, faithful preserve-by-default split. Gate-exempt.Rubric (3 → 4): c1 unchanged · c2 = name the failure mode · c3 (NEW) = explain the mechanism · c4 = regime distinction (was c3).
Decomposition
F,T,F,T.)Post-split distribution (21 pairs)
8 × 4-of-4 · 2 × 3-of-4 (p006, p008) · 2 × 2-of-4 (p007-differential, p010) · 2 × 1-of-4 (p009, p011) · 5 on-topic-all-missed · 2 off-topic.
Local validation
lint_unit_markdown/ingest_units --check— cleanrun_regression_set --check— 21 pairs validpytest— 20/20Ready to merge (gate-exempt). One unit left in the MEDIUM batch: Unit 9.
Generated by Claude Code