Add evidence-driven Value Map evaluation - #51
Merged
Conversation
bigboateng
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 18, 2026 20:14
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Adds an evidence-driven evaluation layer for Value Map without changing the canonical public skill.
Why
Value Map needs to preserve one external claim while allowing repository truth to change the grounded conclusion. Comparing generated prose or asking another model to judge it would not verify that mapping boundary.
This PR tests a controlled inverse relation instead: the exact same message is projected against one repository that only implements
isEvenand another that implements bothisEvenandisOdd. Deterministic gates require the first result to retain a testable gap and the second to surface a blocking contradiction, with validpath:lineevidence throughout.The ZCA slice is one source claim, two explicit code truths, and one mapping operator. The value emerges when source meaning stays stable while the code-grounded conclusion changes correctly.
Implementation
Verification
pnpm typecheckpnpm buildpnpm lab:value-mapgemini-2.5-flash: all 11 gates and both negative controls pass using exactly 3 API calls (2,253 input / 2,743 output tokens)gpt-5.6-sol: both controlled repositories produce the expected grounded distinction; all 9 gates and the swapped-response negative control pass (2 sessions, 19,645 host tokens)git diff --checkLimits
These are controlled smoke tests, not population-level accuracy or product-value claims. The fixtures are synthetic by design, and the consumer smoke test checks stable semantic invariants rather than byte-for-byte prose.
Publishing impact
The canonical
value-map/SKILL.mdis unchanged. The workflow path filter now ensures candidate research, fixtures, and benchmark changes do not publish a public Value Map release.