Skip to main content

自动研究特征发现

机器翻译译自英文(docs.typesafe.ai)本页 46 段里 4 段还没译

文档索引

在以下地址获取完整的文档索引:https://docs.typesafe.ai/llms.txt 使用此文件可以在进一步探索之前发现所有可用页面。

自动研究特征发现

运行一个自动研究循环,提出 TypeSafe 问题,将自由文本转换为数值特征,并利用模型误差改进有监督的 CatBoost 回归器。

TypeSafe 问题将自由文本转换为监督式 CatBoost 模型的数值特征;使用自动研究循环来发现这些问题。

CatBoost 需要数值表格,而品鉴笔记并非如此。本 cookbook 通过围绕笔记提出问题来构建表格,且无需手动编写问题。由 LLM 提出这些问题,TypeSafe 为每一行解答,CatBoost 再基于这些答案进行训练。接下来进入自动研究环节:CatBoost 报告它使用了哪些问题以及哪些行仍存在误差,下一轮提问请求读取该报告,随后循环再次运行。

到最后,你将拥有一个可以指向你自己带标签文本的循环、一个每轮保留误差的曲线图,以及一个最终模型使用最多的问题表。

tasting note
    |
    v
38 TypeSafe answers
    |-- 29 score questions x 2 columns = 58
    |     expected rubric level + answer uncertainty
    `--  9 noul questions  x 1 column  =  9
          probability true
    |
    v
67 numeric columns --> CatBoost --> predicted critic score
                                     held-out RMSE: 1.77 points

一个评分回答会生成两列:答案指向的平均等级,以及围绕该平均值的离散程度。一个名量(noul)回答是单一概率,因此只生成一列。

数据包含 2,000 条葡萄酒评论:输入为品鉴笔记,输出为评论家给出的 80-100 分制评分。RMSE 以评论家评分点为单位衡量预测误差,较大误判的惩罚更重,数值越低越好。下表中所有数值均来自模型和循环从未见过的 800 条测试评论。

笔记转换为评分的方式RMSE
预测训练行的平均评分3.09
相同的 CatBoost 模型,将笔记视为词数2.47
让 TypeSafe 直接生成评分(经重缩放和平移)2.15
一次提案调用中的 18 个问题,无循环1.87
循环五轮后的 38 个问题1.77

最后两行是循环。一次没有依据的提案调用达到了 1.87。再经过四轮阅读其自身最差的预测,达到 1.77。大部分增益来自第一次调用,其后的四轮增加了多少,将在下面进一步测量。

Tip

想进一步深化本笔记本或将其应用于其他问题?请参阅 后续步骤。

from __future__ import annotations

import json
import os
import random
import textwrap
import urllib.request
from concurrent.futures import ThreadPoolExecutor
from pathlib import Path
from time import perf_counter
from typing import NamedTuple

import matplotlib
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np
from catboost import CatBoostRegressor
from cooksafe import JsonCache, make_playground_link
from IPython.display import Markdown, display
from typesafe_sdk import Noul, NoulCriteria, Score, TypeSafeClient

matplotlib.use("Agg")  # headless render

TYPESAFE_MODEL = "jev-1.12"
FOLDS, REPEATS = 5, 3  # repeats steady the error at this sample size
CATBOOST = dict(
    iterations=400,
    depth=4,
    learning_rate=0.05,
    loss_function="RMSE",
    verbose=0,
    random_seed=0,
    thread_count=1,
    allow_writing_files=False,
)

client = TypeSafeClient(
    # keyless kernels replay the cache
    api_key=os.environ.get("TYPESAFE_API_KEY", "cache-only"),
    base_url=os.environ.get("TYPESAFE_ENDPOINT"),
    timeout=120.0,
)
json_cache = JsonCache(Path("json_cache.json"))

# ----------------------------------------------------------------- the specification

INTENSITY_LEVELS = [
    "Not present in this note at all",
    "Barely present - mentioned once, in passing",
    "Present at a moderate level",
    "Present strongly - the note dwells on it",
    "Dominant - the note is largely about this",
]
PRESENCE_CRITERIA = NoulCriteria(
    true="The note states this or clearly implies it",
    false="The note gives no indication of this",
)

# Asking for the score outright: ten quality bands, rescaled onto the 80-100 critic scale.
SCORE_LEVELS = [
    "Faulty or unpleasant - the note is mostly criticism",
    "Barely acceptable - drinkable, with nothing to recommend it",
    "Simple and sound - correct, plain, forgettable",
    "Pleasant everyday wine - some appeal, little depth",
    "Good - clear varietal character, well made",
    "Very good - balanced, with something to say",
    "Excellent - complex and structured",
    "Outstanding - depth and length, built to age",
    "Superb - among the best of its type",
    "Profound - the note treats it as exceptional",
]

# Structured output requires every property in `required`, so unused fields come back empty.
PROPOSAL_SCHEMA = {
    "type": "object",
    "properties": {
        "actions": {
            "type": "array",
            "items": {
                "type": "object",
                "properties": {
                    "op": {"type": "string", "enum": ["add", "revise", "drop"]},
                    "target": {"type": "string"},
                    "name": {"type": "string"},
                    "kind": {"type": "string", "enum": ["intensity", "presence"]},
                    "question": {"type": "string"},
                },
                "required": ["op", "target", "name", "kind", "question"],
                "additionalProperties": False,
            },
        }
    },
    "required": ["actions"],
    "additionalProperties": False,
}

PROPOSALS = 18  # actions the proposer may return per round

# The one string that knows this is about wine. Point it at your own label and text.
PROPOSER_TASK = f"""You are designing numeric features for a gradient-boosting model that
predicts the score a wine critic gave (an integer from 80 to 100) from the tasting note alone.
The model sees nothing but the features you design.

Return up to {PROPOSALS} actions. Each action is one of:

- {{"op": "add", "target": "", "name": ..., "kind": ..., "question": ...}}
  A new feature.
- {{"op": "revise", "target": <name of an existing feature>, "name": ..., "kind": ...,
  "question": ...}}
  Replace that feature's question with better wording. Use this when a feature measures the
  right thing badly: too narrow, too vague, or worded so nearly every note answers the same.
- {{"op": "drop", "target": <name of an existing feature>, "name": "", "kind": "intensity",
  "question": ""}}
  Remove a feature that is not earning its place.

`kind` is "intensity" for something with a degree, or "presence" for a yes/no fact.
`question` is what gets asked about one tasting note.

An "intensity" question is graded against this fixed five-level rubric, so word it so that the
levels make sense:
{chr(10).join(f"  {i}. {level}" for i, level in enumerate(INTENSITY_LEVELS))}

A "presence" question is answered as the probability that it is true of the note.

Good features can be judged from the note's own words, vary from note to note, and carry
information about quality that the other features do not. Reviewers describe structure, fruit,
oak, length, complexity, and drinkability, and they also signal quality through word choice."""


class Split(NamedTuple):
    """The rows, their labels, and which half the loop is allowed to read."""

    notes: list[str]
    scores: np.ndarray
    dev: np.ndarray
    test: np.ndarray


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- the data

WINEMAG_CSV = (
    "https://huggingface.co/datasets/GroNLP/ik-nlp-22_winemag/resolve/"
    "90eb39f35fc64e556fc17f06d4137a4a69ec3297/train.csv"
)


@json_cache
def load_slice(n_dev: int, n_test: int, seed: int) -> dict:
    """Fetch the pinned CSV and take a seeded sample of note + score, one row per note."""
    import csv
    import io

    request = urllib.request.Request(
        WINEMAG_CSV, headers={"User-Agent": "typesafe-cookbook/1.0"}
    )
    with urllib.request.urlopen(request, timeout=300) as response:
        text = response.read().decode()
    rows, seen = [], set()
    for row in csv.DictReader(io.StringIO(text)):  # a few notes repeat verbatim
        if not row["description"] or not row["points"] or row["description"] in seen:
            continue
        seen.add(row["description"])
        rows.append((row["description"], float(row["points"])))
    random.Random(seed).shuffle(rows)
    picked = rows[: n_dev + n_test]
    return {"notes": [r[0] for r in picked], "points": [r[1] for r in picked]}


def example_rows(split: Split, out_of_fold: np.ndarray | None, n: int) -> list[int]:
    """Select representative dev rows for a proposer round."""
    dev = split.dev
    if out_of_fold is None:
        ranked = dev[np.argsort(split.scores[dev], kind="stable")]
        return [int(ranked[round(q * (len(ranked) - 1))]) for q in np.linspace(0, 1, n)]
    error = np.abs(split.scores[dev] - out_of_fold)
    order = np.argsort(-error, kind="stable")
    worst = [int(dev[i]) for i in order[: n // 2]]
    best = [int(dev[i]) for i in order[len(order) - (n - n // 2) :]]
    return worst + best


def example_block(
    rows: list[int],
    split: Split,
    out_of_fold: np.ndarray | None,
    previous: np.ndarray | None = None,
) -> str:
    """Format selected rows for the proposer."""
    if out_of_fold is None:
        head = "Example notes, with the score each one was given:"
        body = [f"- scored {split.scores[r]:.0f}: {split.notes[r]}" for r in rows]
        return head + "\n" + "\n".join(body)

    head = (
        "Dev notes, worst-predicted first. The first half is where your current questions "
        "miss by the most and the second half is where they are already right, so what "
        "separates the halves is what the questions have not captured."
    )
    if previous is not None:
        head += (
            " Each line also carries what the previous round predicted, so you can see which "
            "notes your last batch of questions moved."
        )
    body = []
    for r in rows:
        line = f"- scored {split.scores[r]:.0f}, predicted {out_of_fold[r]:.1f}"
        if previous is not None:
            line += f" (last round {previous[r]:.1f})"
        body.append(f"{line}: {split.notes[r]}")
    return head + "\n" + "\n".join(body)


def load_split(n_dev: int, n_test: int, seed: int = 0) -> Split:
    # keyword, because the cache key is the function name plus how each argument was spelled
    data = load_slice(n_dev, n_test, seed=seed)
    return Split(
        notes=data["notes"],
        scores=np.array(data["points"]),
        dev=np.arange(n_dev),
        test=np.arange(n_dev, n_dev + n_test),
    )


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- step 1: propose


def proposal_prompt(examples: str, feedback: str, accepted: list[dict]) -> str:
    parts = [PROPOSER_TASK, "\n" + examples]
    if accepted:
        parts.append(
            "\nThe features you have now. `add` must not duplicate one of these; `revise` and "
            "`drop` refer to one by name:\n"
            + "\n".join(
                f"- {f['name']} ({f['kind']}): {f['question']}" for f in accepted
            )
        )
    if feedback:
        parts.append("\nHow the model did with those features:\n" + feedback)
    return "\n".join(parts)


@json_cache
def propose(model: str, round_index: int, prompt: str) -> dict:
    """One proposal call. Every number in `prompt` is rounded so a replay hits the cache."""
    if model.startswith("claude"):
        import anthropic

        response = anthropic.Anthropic(
            api_key=os.environ.get("ANTHROPIC_API_KEY", "cache-only")
        ).messages.create(
            model=model,
            max_tokens=16000,
            output_config={
                "effort": "medium",
                "format": {"type": "json_schema", "schema": PROPOSAL_SCHEMA},
            },
            messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}],
        )
        body = next(block.text for block in response.content if block.type == "text")
        usage = [response.usage.input_tokens or 0, response.usage.output_tokens or 0]
    else:
        from openai import OpenAI

        response = OpenAI(
            api_key=os.environ.get("OPENAI_API_KEY", "cache-only")
        ).chat.completions.create(
            model=model,
            reasoning_effort="high",
            max_completion_tokens=16000,
            response_format={"type": "json_object"},
            messages=[
                {
                    "role": "user",
                    "content": prompt
                    + "\n\nReply with JSON matching this schema:\n"
                    + json.dumps(PROPOSAL_SCHEMA),
                }
            ],
        )
        body = response.choices[0].message.content
        usage = [response.usage.prompt_tokens, response.usage.completion_tokens]
    return {"actions": json.loads(body)["actions"][:PROPOSALS], "usage": usage}


def slug(name: str, taken: set[str]) -> str:
    """Names become question ids and column labels, so keep them plain and unique."""
    base = (
        "".join(c if c.isalnum() else "_" for c in name.lower()).strip("_") or "feature"
    )
    candidate, n = base, 2
    while candidate in taken:
        candidate, n = f"{base}_{n}", n + 1
    return candidate


def to_candidates(actions: list[dict], accepted: list[dict], round_index: int) -> tuple:
    """Split a round's actions into screenable candidates and a list of names to drop."""
    live = {f["name"] for f in accepted}
    drops = [a["target"] for a in actions if a["op"] == "drop" and a["target"] in live]
    replacing = {
        a["target"] for a in actions if a["op"] == "revise" and a["target"] in live
    }
    # a revision may keep the name it replaces, since that feature is on its way out
    taken, candidates = live - replacing, []
    for action in actions:
        if action["op"] == "drop":
            continue
        if action["op"] == "revise" and action["target"] not in live:
            continue  # a revision of something that is not there
        name = slug(action["name"], taken)
        taken.add(name)
        candidates.append(
            {
                "id": f"{name}@{round_index}",  # unique, so earlier rounds keep their columns
                "name": name,
                "kind": action["kind"],
                "question": action["question"],
                "replaces": action["target"] if action["op"] == "revise" else "",
            }
        )
    return candidates, drops


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- step 2: answer


def feature_questions(features: list[dict]) -> dict:
    questions = {}
    for feature in features:
        if feature["kind"] == "intensity":
            questions[feature["name"]] = Score(
                instructions=feature["question"], criteria=INTENSITY_LEVELS
            )
        else:
            questions[feature["name"]] = Noul(
                instructions=feature["question"], criteria=PRESENCE_CRITERIA
            )
    return questions


@json_cache
def answer(model: str, note: str, features_json: str) -> dict:
    """One request per note; every question of the round rides it. Keeps every probability."""
    features = json.loads(features_json)
    started = perf_counter()
    response = client.system_one(
        state=note, questions=feature_questions(features), model=model
    )
    raw = {}
    for feature in features:
        got = response.answers[feature["name"]]
        if feature["kind"] == "intensity":
            raw[feature["name"]] = [
                got.probabilities.get(i, 0.0) for i in range(len(INTENSITY_LEVELS))
            ]
        else:
            raw[feature["name"]] = [got.noul]
    return {
        "raw": raw,
        "seconds": round(perf_counter() - started, 2),
        "input_tokens": response.usage.input_tokens or 0,
        "output_tokens": response.usage.output_tokens or 0,
    }


def featurize(notes: list[str], features: list[dict]) -> dict:
    """Answer one question set for many notes: one request each, eight in flight."""
    payload = json.dumps(features, sort_keys=True)
    with ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=8) as pool:
        results = list(
            pool.map(lambda note: answer(TYPESAFE_MODEL, note, payload), notes)
        )
    return {
        f["name"]: np.array([r["raw"][f["name"]] for r in results], dtype=float)
        for f in features
    }


def encode(feature: dict, probabilities: np.ndarray, mode: str) -> list[tuple]:
    """Turn one question's probabilities into named columns."""
    name = feature["name"]
    if feature["kind"] == "presence":
        return [(name, probabilities[:, 0])]  # one number is all there is
    levels = np.arange(probabilities.shape[1])
    mean = probabilities @ levels
    if mode == "mean":
        return [(name, mean)]
    if mode == "mean_spread":
        variance = probabilities @ (levels**2) - mean**2
        return [(name, mean), (f"{name}_sd", np.sqrt(np.clip(variance, 0, None)))]
    return [(f"{name}_p{i}", probabilities[:, i]) for i in levels]


def design(features: list[dict], answers_for: dict, mode: str) -> tuple:
    """Stack every feature's columns into one matrix, plus a label per column."""
    columns, labels = [], []
    for feature in features:
        for label, column in encode(feature, answers_for[feature["id"]], mode):
            columns.append(column)
            labels.append(label)
    return np.column_stack(columns), labels


def plain(features: list[dict]) -> list[dict]:
    """What goes on the wire and into the cache key: no id, no bookkeeping."""
    return [
        {"name": f["name"], "kind": f["kind"], "question": f["question"]}
        for f in features
    ]


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- step 3: fit


def rmse(y: np.ndarray, p: np.ndarray) -> float:
    return float(np.sqrt(np.mean((y - p) ** 2)))


def spearman(a: np.ndarray, b: np.ndarray) -> float:
    """Rank correlation: does the model order the wines the way the critic did?"""
    ranks = (
        np.argsort(np.argsort(a)).astype(float),
        np.argsort(np.argsort(b)).astype(float),
    )
    return float(np.corrcoef(*ranks)[0, 1])


def folds(y: np.ndarray, k: int, seed: int) -> list[np.ndarray]:
    """Label-stratified k-fold: sort by the label with a seeded tiebreak, then deal off the top."""
    rng = np.random.default_rng(seed)
    order = np.lexsort((rng.random(len(y)), y))
    return [np.sort(order[i::k]) for i in range(k)]


def cross_validate(X: np.ndarray, y: np.ndarray) -> tuple[np.ndarray, float]:
    out_of_fold = np.zeros((REPEATS, len(y)))
    for repeat in range(REPEATS):
        for fold in folds(y, FOLDS, seed=repeat):
            train = np.setdiff1d(np.arange(len(y)), fold)
            model = CatBoostRegressor(**CATBOOST).fit(X[train], y[train])
            out_of_fold[repeat, fold] = model.predict(X[fold])
    scores = [rmse(y, out_of_fold[repeat]) for repeat in range(REPEATS)]
    return out_of_fold.mean(axis=0), float(np.mean(scores))


def importances(X: np.ndarray, y: np.ndarray) -> np.ndarray:
    return CatBoostRegressor(**CATBOOST).fit(X, y).get_feature_importance()


def paired_gain(y: np.ndarray, before: np.ndarray, after: np.ndarray) -> tuple:
    """Bootstrap the paired held-out RMSE change."""
    squared = ((y - before) ** 2, (y - after) ** 2)
    rng = np.random.default_rng(0)
    drawn = []
    for _ in range(2000):
        rows = rng.integers(0, len(y), len(y))
        drawn.append(
            np.sqrt(squared[1][rows].mean()) - np.sqrt(squared[0][rows].mean())
        )
    drawn = np.array(drawn)
    return (
        rmse(y, after) - rmse(y, before),
        float(np.percentile(drawn, 2.5)),
        float(np.percentile(drawn, 97.5)),
    )


def fit_predict(X: np.ndarray, split: Split) -> np.ndarray:
    model = CatBoostRegressor(**CATBOOST).fit(X[split.dev], split.scores[split.dev])
    return model.predict(X[split.test])


def fit_predict_text(split: Split) -> np.ndarray:
    """The reference arm: the same model, handed the note instead of the columns."""
    from catboost import Pool

    raw = np.array([[note] for note in split.notes], dtype=object)
    model = CatBoostRegressor(**CATBOOST).fit(
        Pool(raw[split.dev], split.scores[split.dev], text_features=[0])
    )
    return model.predict(Pool(raw[split.test], text_features=[0]))


def evaluate(
    features: list[dict], answers_for: dict, split: Split, mode: str
) -> tuple[np.ndarray, float]:
    """Cross-validated error on the dev rows for one candidate question set."""
    X, _ = design(features, answers_for, mode)
    return cross_validate(X[split.dev], split.scores[split.dev])


def swap_in(accepted: list[dict], feature: dict) -> list[dict] | None:
    """The accepted set with `feature` in place of the one it revises, or None if it is gone."""
    at = next(
        (i for i, f in enumerate(accepted) if f["name"] == feature["replaces"]), None
    )
    if at is None:
        return None
    trial = list(accepted)
    trial[at] = {k: feature[k] for k in ("id", "name", "kind", "question")}
    return trial


def try_change(
    trial: list[dict],
    accepted: list[dict],
    cv: float,
    answers_for: dict,
    split: Split,
    mode: str,
    tolerance: float,
) -> tuple[list[dict], float, str, bool]:
    """Refit with the change and keep it only if the dev error improves. No API calls."""
    _, cv_trial = evaluate(trial, answers_for, split, mode)
    if cv_trial <= cv + tolerance:
        return trial, cv_trial, f"CV {cv:.3f} -> {cv_trial:.3f}", True
    return accepted, cv, f"would cost {cv_trial - cv:+.3f}", False


def owner_of(label: str, features: list[dict]) -> dict:
    """Which feature a column label belongs to - encodings suffix the name."""
    exact = next((f for f in features if f["name"] == label), None)
    if exact:
        return exact
    return next(f for f in features if label.startswith(f["name"] + "_"))


def importance_per_feature(
    features: list[dict], labels: list[str], column_importances: np.ndarray
) -> dict:
    """Sum each question's CatBoost column importances.

    Intensity questions can produce multiple model columns. Combining their normalized
    importances gives one percentage share per question.
    """
    total = {f["name"]: 0.0 for f in features}
    for label, column_importance in zip(labels, column_importances):
        total[owner_of(label, features)["name"]] += float(column_importance)
    return total


def feedback_for(
    history: list[float],
    accepted: list[dict],
    answers_for: dict,
    split: Split,
    mode: str,
    out_of_fold: np.ndarray,
    previous: np.ndarray | None,
) -> str:
    """The scoreboard the next proposal call reads. The notes themselves arrive separately,
    through `example_block`. Numbers are rounded before they enter the prompt."""
    X, labels = design(accepted, answers_for, mode)
    dev, scores = split.dev, split.scores
    by_name = importance_per_feature(accepted, labels, importances(X[dev], scores[dev]))

    lines = ["Cross-validated RMSE in points so far, lower is better:"]
    lines += [f"  round {i + 1}: {v:.2f}" for i, v in enumerate(history)]
    if previous is not None:
        now, before = np.abs(scores[dev] - out_of_fold), np.abs(scores[dev] - previous)
        better, worse = int((now < before - 0.1).sum()), int((now > before + 0.1).sum())
        lines.append(
            f"\nAgainst the previous round, {better} of the {len(dev)} dev notes are now "
            f"predicted better by more than 0.1 points and {worse} are predicted worse."
        )
    lines.append(
        "\nYour features, with importance as a percentage of the total and the spread of the "
        "column across the dev rows. Low importance or low spread means the question is not "
        "doing much; revise or drop it."
    )
    for feature in sorted(accepted, key=lambda f: -by_name.get(f["name"], 0.0)):
        column = encode(feature, answers_for[feature["id"]], mode)[0][1]
        lines.append(
            f"  {feature['name']} ({feature['kind']}): "
            f"{by_name.get(feature['name'], 0.0):.1f}% importance, "
            f"spread {column[dev].std():.2f}"
        )
    return "\n".join(lines)


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- the loop itself


class Discovery(NamedTuple):
    """Artifacts returned by the discovery loop."""

    accepted: list[dict]  # the question set it ended with
    answers_for: dict  # feature id -> (rows x levels) probabilities
    snapshots: list[list[dict]]  # the set as it stood at the end of each round
    history: list[float]  # dev CV error after each round
    batches: list[tuple]  # what each round sent, for the request table
    journal: list[tuple]  # every action and what became of it


def run_loop(
    split: Split,
    proposer: str,
    rounds: int,
    examples: int,
    mode: str,
    min_spread: float,
    tolerance: float,
) -> Discovery:
    """Run the propose, answer, fit, and feedback loop."""
    shown = example_rows(split, None, examples)  # round 1 has nothing predicted yet
    out_of_fold = previous = None
    got_from = Discovery([], {}, [], [], [], [])
    accepted, answers_for = got_from.accepted, got_from.answers_for
    snapshots, history = got_from.snapshots, got_from.history
    batches, journal = got_from.batches, got_from.journal
    feedback = ""

    for round_index in range(1, rounds + 1):
        block = example_block(shown, split, out_of_fold, previous)
        actions = propose(
            proposer, round_index, proposal_prompt(block, feedback, accepted)
        )["actions"]
        keep, drops = to_candidates(actions, accepted, round_index)

        if keep:  # one request per row, carrying every question this round proposed
            batches.append((round_index, plain(keep)))
            answers = featurize(split.notes, plain(keep))
            for feature in keep:
                answers_for[feature["id"]] = answers[feature["name"]]

        for (
            feature
        ) in keep:  # an add goes in; importance says later whether it earned it
            if feature["replaces"]:
                continue
            column = encode(feature, answers_for[feature["id"]], mode)[0][1]
            flat = float(column[split.dev].std()) < min_spread
            journal.append(
                (round_index, "flat" if flat else "add", feature["name"], "")
            )
            if not flat:
                accepted.append(
                    {k: feature[k] for k in ("id", "name", "kind", "question")}
                )

        _, cv = evaluate(accepted, answers_for, split, mode)
        trial_args = (answers_for, split, mode, tolerance)

        for feature in [f for f in keep if f["replaces"]]:  # every revision is tried
            trial = swap_in(accepted, feature)
            if trial is None:  # it revises something an earlier round already dropped
                journal.append(
                    (round_index, "stale", feature["name"], "target is gone")
                )
                continue
            accepted[:], cv, note, took = try_change(trial, accepted, cv, *trial_args)
            what = "revise" if took else "reject"
            journal.append(
                (
                    round_index,
                    what,
                    feature["name"],
                    f"was {feature['replaces']}, {note}",
                )
            )

        for name in drops:  # and so is every drop
            trial = [f for f in accepted if f["name"] != name]
            if not trial:
                continue
            accepted[:], cv, note, took = try_change(trial, accepted, cv, *trial_args)
            journal.append((round_index, "drop" if took else "keep", name, note))

        previous, (out_of_fold, cv) = (
            out_of_fold,
            evaluate(accepted, answers_for, split, mode),
        )
        history.append(cv)
        snapshots.append(list(accepted))
        feedback = feedback_for(
            history, accepted, answers_for, split, mode, out_of_fold, previous
        )
        # next round reads the rows these questions get most wrong, and as many they get right
        shown = example_rows(split, out_of_fold, examples)
        report(round_index, keep, drops, journal, accepted, cv)

    return got_from


def report(
    round_index: int,
    keep: list[dict],
    drops: list[str],
    journal: list[tuple],
    accepted: list[dict],
    cv: float,
) -> None:
    """One block per round: the counts, the names it added, then everything with a number."""
    revised = sum(1 for f in keep if f["replaces"])
    print(
        f"round {round_index}: {len(keep) - revised} add, {revised} revise, "
        f"{len(drops)} drop"
    )
    this_round = [j for j in journal if j[0] == round_index]
    added = [name for _, what, name, _ in this_round if what == "add"]
    if added:
        print(
            textwrap.fill(
                ", ".join(added),
                88,
                initial_indent="  added  ",
                subsequent_indent=" " * 10,
            )
        )
    for _, what, name, note in this_round:  # everything carrying a number of its own
        if what != "add":
            print(f"  {what:<7}{name:<34}{note}")
    print(f"  -> {len(accepted)} features, dev CV RMSE {cv:.3f}\n")


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- asking for the score


@json_cache
def ask_score(model: str, note: str) -> dict:
    """One `Score` over ten quality bands, read as a level and rescaled to 80-100."""
    response = client.system_one(
        state=note,
        questions={
            "quality": Score(
                instructions=(
                    "Judging only by what this tasting note says, how good is the wine?"
                ),
                criteria=SCORE_LEVELS,
            )
        },
        model=model,
    )
    got = response.answers["quality"]
    top = len(SCORE_LEVELS) - 1
    expected = sum(k * v for k, v in got.probabilities.items())
    return {
        # level 0 is the bottom of the critic's scale, level 9 the top
        "expected": 80.0 + 20.0 * expected / top,
        "picked": 80.0 + 20.0 * got.score / top,
        "input_tokens": response.usage.input_tokens or 0,
        "output_tokens": response.usage.output_tokens or 0,
    }


# ----------------------------------------------------------------- charts

SURFACE, INK, INK2, MUTED = "#fcfcfb", "#0b0b0b", "#52514e", "#898781"
GRID, AXIS, BLUE, ORANGE = "#e1e0d9", "#c3c2b7", "#2a78d6", "#eb6834"


def style(ax) -> None:
    ax.set_facecolor(SURFACE)
    for side in ("top", "right"):
        ax.spines[side].set_visible(False)
    for side in ("left", "bottom"):
        ax.spines[side].set_color(AXIS)
    ax.tick_params(colors=MUTED, labelcolor=INK2, labelsize=9)
    ax.set_axisbelow(True)


def polarity(feature: dict, answers_for: dict, split: Split) -> float:
    """Rank correlation between a question's answer and the critic score, on the dev rows.

    Positive means a higher answer goes with a better review, negative the opposite. It is
    what orders the rows of the feature map, so the map reads as a gradient that flips.
    """
    column = encode(feature, answers_for[feature["id"]], "mean")[0][1]
    return spearman(column[split.dev], split.scores[split.dev])


def reviews_heatmap(
    plt,
    questions: list[dict],
    answers_for: dict,
    split: Split,
    rows: tuple,
):
    """Compare held-out reviews across the discovered questions, best-signal first.

    Rows arrive sorted from the questions that rise with the score to the ones that fall with
    it, so a row above the divider shades left to right and a row below it shades right to
    left.
    """

    def value_of(feature: dict, row: int) -> float:
        return float(encode(feature, answers_for[feature["id"]], "mean")[0][1][row])

    signs = [polarity(question, answers_for, split) for question in questions]
    flip = next((i for i, s in enumerate(signs) if s < 0), len(questions))

    raw = np.array(
        [[value_of(question, row) for row in rows] for question in questions]
    )
    normalized = np.array(
        [
            values / (4 if question["kind"] == "intensity" else 1)
            for question, values in zip(questions, raw)
        ]
    )
    cmap = matplotlib.colors.LinearSegmentedColormap.from_list(
        "typesafe_heat", [SURFACE, "#f7c7ad", ORANGE]
    )
    fig, ax = plt.subplots(
        figsize=(9.5, 1.8 + 0.58 * len(questions)), facecolor=SURFACE
    )
    image = ax.imshow(normalized, aspect="auto", cmap=cmap, vmin=0, vmax=1)
    row_labels = []
    for question, sign in zip(questions, signs):
        kind = "score" if question["kind"] == "intensity" else "noul"
        prefix = f"{sign:+.2f} ({kind}) "
        lines = textwrap.wrap(
            " ".join(question["question"].split()),
            width=52,
            max_lines=2,
            placeholder="...",
            break_long_words=False,
            break_on_hyphens=False,
        )
        row_labels.append(prefix + (f"\n{' ' * len(prefix)}").join(lines))
    column_labels = [
        f"#{i}\n{split.scores[row]:.0f} points\n{' '.join(split.notes[row].split())[:15]}..."
        for i, row in enumerate(rows, 1)
    ]
    ax.set_yticks(np.arange(len(questions)), row_labels)
    ax.set_xticks(np.arange(len(rows)), column_labels)
    ax.tick_params(
        axis="x", top=True, labeltop=True, bottom=False, labelbottom=False, pad=8
    )
    ax.tick_params(axis="y", labelsize=8.5)
    for side in ax.spines.values():
        side.set_visible(False)
    ax.set_xticks(np.arange(-0.5, len(rows), 1), minor=True)
    ax.set_yticks(np.arange(-0.5, len(questions), 1), minor=True)
    ax.grid(which="minor", color=SURFACE, linewidth=2)
    ax.tick_params(which="minor", bottom=False, left=False)
    for i, question in enumerate(questions):
        for j, value in enumerate(raw[i]):
            label = (
                f"{value:.1f}" if question["kind"] == "intensity" else f"{value:.2f}"
            )
            color = SURFACE if normalized[i, j] > 0.58 else INK2
            ax.text(j, i, label, ha="center", va="center", color=color, fontsize=8)
    # the line where the questions stop rising with the score and start falling with it
    if 0 < flip < len(questions):
        ax.axhline(flip - 0.5, color=INK, linewidth=1.2)
        ax.annotate(
            "a higher answer means a worse review, below this line",
            (len(rows) - 0.5, flip - 0.5),
            xytext=(-4, 5),
            textcoords="offset points",
            va="bottom",
            ha="right",
            color=INK2,
            fontsize=8.5,
        )
    colorbar = fig.colorbar(image, ax=ax, fraction=0.025, pad=0.025)
    colorbar.set_ticks([0, 0.5, 1])
    colorbar.set_label("normalized answer", color=INK2, fontsize=8.5)
    colorbar.ax.tick_params(labelsize=8, colors=INK2)
    fig.suptitle(
        "Every question, on five held-out reviews from worst to best",
        x=0.01,
        y=0.995,
        ha="left",
        color=INK,
        fontsize=11,
    )
    fig.text(
        0.01,
        0.972,
        "sorted by how the answer moves with the score, so each row above the line shades "
        "left to right and each row below it shades the other way",
        color=MUTED,
        fontsize=9,
    )
    fig.text(
        0.01,
        0.005,
        "Row labels lead with the rank correlation between that question's answer and the "
        "critic score. Cell text is each question's native scale: score 0-4, noul 0-1.",
        color=MUTED,
        fontsize=8.5,
    )
    return fig


def rounds_chart(
    plt, curve: list[tuple], history: list[float], n_test: int, gain: tuple
):
    """Dev error and held-out error per round. The trend is the point, not the gap."""
    rounds = list(range(1, len(curve) + 1))
    values = [v for _, v in curve]

    fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(7, 3.9), facecolor=SURFACE)
    style(ax)
    ax.grid(axis="y", color=GRID, linewidth=0.8)
    # each dev fold trains on four fifths of the rows, so the dev line sits the higher of the two
    ax.fill_between(rounds, history, values, color=GRID, alpha=0.75, linewidth=0)
    ax.plot(
        rounds,
        history,
        marker="o",
        color=BLUE,
        linewidth=2,
        linestyle="--",
        label="dev, cross-validated - what the loop optimises",
    )
    ax.plot(
        rounds,
        values,
        marker="o",
        color=ORANGE,
        linewidth=2,
        label="held out - what that actually buys",
    )
    # label each point on the outside of the pair, so neither line crowds its own numbers
    for x, dev_value, test_value in zip(rounds, history, values):
        for value, other in ((dev_value, test_value), (test_value, dev_value)):
            ax.annotate(
                f"{value:.2f}",
                (x, value),
                textcoords="offset points",
                xytext=(0, 8 if value >= other else -16),
                ha="center",
                color=INK2,
                fontsize=8.5,
            )
    ax.set_xticks(
        rounds, [f"round {x}\n{n} features" for x, (n, _) in zip(rounds, curve)]
    )
    ax.set_ylabel("RMSE in points (lower is better)", color=INK2, fontsize=9)
    # tight around the two lines: the whole finding lives inside 0.15 of a point
    low, high = min(values + history), max(values + history)
    ax.set_ylim(low - 0.10, high + 0.05)
    difference, low_ci, high_ci = gain
    ax.set_title(
        f"{len(rounds)} rounds of the loop, scored on {n_test} held-out reviews",
        loc="left",
        color=INK,
        fontsize=11,
        pad=20,
    )
    # the number the chart is really about: is the held-out move bigger than the noise?
    ax.text(
        0,
        1.015,
        f"round 1 to round {len(rounds)}, held out: {difference:+.3f} points, "
        f"95% CI [{low_ci:+.3f}, {high_ci:+.3f}]",
        transform=ax.transAxes,
        color=MUTED,
        fontsize=9,
    )
    ax.legend(frameon=False, labelcolor=INK2, fontsize=9, loc="lower left")
    return fig

Setup

pip install anthropic openai catboost numpy matplotlib ipython "typesafe-sdk>=0.5.7" cooksafe --extra-index-url https://pypi.typesafe.ai/

然后设置 TYPESAFE_API_KEY 和 ANTHROPIC_API_KEY。所有 API 调用均缓存至随 cookbook 提供的 json_cache.json 文件中,因此重新渲染时会重放这些结果而无需发起新请求。删除该文件以重新运行实时请求。数据来源于 2026-08-03 的 TypeSafe jev-1.12 和 claude-sonnet-5。propose() 包含一个用于 gpt-5.6-luna 的备用分支,但未实际运行。

第一个代码单元格是整个实现:API 调用、编码、指标、图表样式。它存在于此以便此文件独立运行,文档站点将其折叠隐藏。初次阅读时跳过它——cookbook 从它下面开始。

N_DEV, N_TEST = 1200, 800  # the loop reads dev labels only; test is scored once
ROUNDS = 5  # a round answers questions for all 2,000 rows: 2,000 requests
PROPOSER = "claude-sonnet-5"  # or "gpt-5.6-luna"; the cache holds the Anthropic run
EXAMPLES = 60  # dev notes the proposer reads per round, half of them its worst misses
MIN_SPREAD = 0.05  # a column this flat cannot separate anything, so it is not kept
CHANGE_TOLERANCE = 0.0  # a revision or drop has to improve dev error, not just not hurt
ENCODING = "mean_spread"  # a score answer becomes two columns: its mean and spread

split = load_split(N_DEV, N_TEST, seed=0)
NOTES, SCORES, DEV, TEST = split.notes, split.scores, split.dev, split.test

print(
    f"{len(DEV)} dev rows, {len(TEST)} held out; scores run "
    f"{SCORES.min():.0f}-{SCORES.max():.0f}, mean {SCORES.mean():.2f}, sd {SCORES.std():.2f}"
)
print(f"\none of the notes:\n{NOTES[0]}")
1200 dev rows, 800 held out; scores run 80-98, mean 88.73, sd 3.17

one of the notes:
A Champagne that is very much wine. The structure and the richness are just right for a food wine, showing ripe acidity, flavors of plums and apricots, and balancing these primary fruits with a dense, complex structure that takes in yeast, maturity and a tight apple skin finish.

循环反复读取 2,000 行中的同 1,200 行(开发集行),并保留那些有助于预测该 1,200 个评分的问题。如果在相同行上进行评分,主要测量的将是循环对自身的拟合程度,因此其余 800 行被保留并在最后一次性进行评分。

两种问题类型

提出的问题属于两种类型之一,类型决定了返回哪个数字。

  • intensity 会转换为 Score,适用于具有程度差异的内容。其五个等级如下所示,该列值为平均等级,因此介于“中等”和“强烈”之间的笔记得分也会落在两者之间。
  • presence 会转换为 Noul,适用于是非事实(例如是否提及了瑕疵)。该列值为单一的概率。

方法

questions <- {}
repeat for each round:
    notes  <- round 1 ? 60 dev notes across the score range
                      : the 30 worst-predicted dev notes + the 30 best,
                        each with its score, this prediction and the last
    actions <- LLM(brief, questions, notes, importance and error so far)
    answers[q] <- TypeSafe(note, all new questions of this round) for every row
    for each added q:      keep it unless its column is flat
    for each revised q:    refit; keep the change only if dev error drops
    for each dropped q:    refit; drop it only if dev error drops
    out_of_fold <- k-fold CatBoost on the columns   # judges, and picks next round's notes

在回答问题之前,没有过滤掉任何问题。一轮中的所有问题都在同一请求中发出,因此多一个问题不会增加额外的请求成本。一个仅适用于十分之一的行的问题,在提案者阅读的 60 条笔记中看起来无用,但在整个集合中却可能是最有用的列。

k 折意味着将开发行分成 k 个部分,并使用在其他部分上训练的模型预测每个部分。这些预测执行三项工作:判断每个修订和删除,挑选下一轮要阅读的笔记,并告诉提案者它的哪些问题有所帮助,以及自上一轮以来它们移动了多少距离。

print("every intensity question is graded on these five levels:\n")
for i, level in enumerate(INTENSITY_LEVELS):
    print(f"  {i}. {level}")
print("\nevery presence question is judged true or false against these:\n")
print(f"  true:  {PRESENCE_CRITERIA['true']}")
print(f"  false: {PRESENCE_CRITERIA['false']}")
print("\nthe brief the proposer works from:\n")
print("\n".join(PROPOSER_TASK.splitlines()[:6]) + "\n  ...")
every intensity question is graded on these five levels:

  0. Not present in this note at all
  1. Barely present - mentioned once, in passing
  2. Present at a moderate level
  3. Present strongly - the note dwells on it
  4. Dominant - the note is largely about this

every presence question is judged true or false against these:

  true:  The note states this or clearly implies it
  false: The note gives no indication of this

the brief the proposer works from:

You are designing numeric features for a gradient-boosting model that
predicts the score a wine critic gave (an integer from 80 to 100) from the tasting note alone.
The model sees nothing but the features you design.

Return up to 18 actions. Each action is one of:

  ...

自动研究循环

run_loop 运行全部五轮并每轮打印一个代码块。新增的问题直接纳入:其答案已获取,其重要性将在后续揭示其是否值得提出。修改或删除则移除模型已使用的列,因此每项变更都会先行尝试:拟合模型,仅当开发集误差降低时才保留。拟合无需 API 调用,因此尝试变更并拒绝它无需额外成本。

run = run_loop(
    split, PROPOSER, ROUNDS, EXAMPLES, ENCODING, MIN_SPREAD, CHANGE_TOLERANCE
)
accepted, answers_for = run.accepted, run.answers_for
snapshots, history = run.snapshots, run.history
round 1: 18 add, 0 revise, 0 drop
  added  complexity, fruit_intensity, tannin_structure, acidity_intensity,
          oak_intensity, finish_length, balance_harmony, aging_potential,
          positive_superlative_language, negative_critical_language,
          drinkability_easiness, body_richness, sweetness_level, texture_descriptors,
          earthy_savory_notes, flaw_or_defect_mentioned,
          single_vineyard_or_prestige_signal, varietal_blend_detail
  -> 18 features, dev CV RMSE 1.903

round 2: 5 add, 3 revise, 3 drop
  added  power_concentration_language, flavor_distinctiveness, generic_fruit_language,
          candied_artificial_flavor, rustic_authentic_character
  reject oak_dominance                     was oak_intensity, would cost +0.005
  revise negative_critical_language        was negative_critical_language, CV 1.897 -> 1.894
  revise single_vineyard_or_prestige_signalwas single_vineyard_or_prestige_signal, CV 1.894 -> 1.881
  keep   finish_length                     would cost +0.009
  keep   texture_descriptors               would cost +0.001
  keep   varietal_blend_detail             would cost +0.023
  -> 23 features, dev CV RMSE 1.881

round 3: 7 add, 2 revise, 1 drop
  added  elegance_finesse_language, minerality_precision_language,
          hedged_qualified_praise, underripe_green_character,
          reviewer_overall_verdict_strength, unusual_or_funky_descriptor_valence,
          botrytis_or_special_winemaking_signal
  revise negative_critical_language        was negative_critical_language, CV 1.868 -> 1.864
  revise finish_quality                    was finish_length, CV 1.864 -> 1.861
  keep   candied_artificial_flavor         would cost +0.014
  -> 30 features, dev CV RMSE 1.861

round 4: 5 add, 2 revise, 3 drop
  added  excess_or_imbalance_signal, descriptive_detail_density,
          critic_enthusiasm_confidence, savory_food_wine_seriousness,
          note_overall_tone_positivity
  revise rustic_authentic_character        was rustic_authentic_character, CV 1.843 -> 1.838
  reject hedged_qualified_praise           was hedged_qualified_praise, would cost +0.014
  keep   botrytis_or_special_winemaking_signalwould cost +0.011
  keep   candied_artificial_flavor         would cost +0.009
  keep   unusual_or_funky_descriptor_valencewould cost +0.010
  -> 35 features, dev CV RMSE 1.838

round 5: 4 add, 2 revise, 8 drop
  added  structural_seriousness, youthful_tension_signal, surface_prettiness_vs_depth,
          price_value_signal
  reject unconventional_character_as_virtuewas rustic_authentic_character, would cost +0.010
  revise flavor_distinctiveness            was flavor_distinctiveness, CV 1.849 -> 1.843
  keep   candied_artificial_flavor         would cost +0.002
  keep   botrytis_or_special_winemaking_signalwould cost +0.003
  keep   hedged_qualified_praise           would cost +0.006
  keep   excess_or_imbalance_signal        would cost +0.005
  drop   underripe_green_character         CV 1.843 -> 1.840
  keep   unusual_or_funky_descriptor_valencewould cost +0.002
  keep   texture_descriptors               would cost +0.001
  keep   generic_fruit_language            would cost +0.000
  -> 38 features, dev CV RMSE 1.840

应用于你自己的数据

PROPOSER_TASK 是唯一提及葡萄酒的字符串,featurize() 接受任何字符串列表。编辑这个简短内容会改变提案提示,而提示是缓存键的一部分,所以下一次运行将为每一轮再次调用 API。

请求数量随行数增长,而非随问题数增长:每轮每行一次请求,因此 10 万行意味着每轮 10 万次请求。修改计为新问题,因此需对每一行再进行一次遍历。逐步增加工作进程池数量。八个工作进程已足以使共享密钥达到速率限制。

问题看到的内容

五个保留评论,分别位于评分范围的每个四分之一处,对照 38 个问题中的 15 个:按重要性排列的前八个评分问题,加上前七个名量问题。

这十五行随后根据答案随评论家评分变化的方向排序。答案随评分上升的问题排在前面,答案随评分下降的问题排在分隔符之后。因此,从左到右(从最差到最好的评论),分隔符上方的答案应呈上升趋势,而分隔符下方的答案应呈下降趋势。

X, labels = design(accepted, answers_for, ENCODING)
column_importances = importances(X[DEV], SCORES[DEV])
# an encoding gives a feature more than one column, so add a feature's columns back up
feature_importances = importance_per_feature(accepted, labels, column_importances)
ranked = sorted(accepted, key=lambda f: -feature_importances[f["name"]])
score_questions = [f for f in ranked if f["kind"] == "intensity"][:8]
noul_questions = [f for f in ranked if f["kind"] == "presence"][:7]
# ordered by which way the answer moves with the score, so the map flips halfway down
heatmap_questions = sorted(
    score_questions + noul_questions,
    key=lambda f: -polarity(f, answers_for, split),
)
ordered_test = TEST[np.argsort(SCORES[TEST], kind="stable")]
positions = np.linspace(0, len(ordered_test) - 1, 5).round().astype(int)
review_rows = tuple(ordered_test[positions])

print("the five held-out heatmap columns:\n")
for i, row in enumerate(review_rows, 1):
    excerpt = " ".join(NOTES[row].split())
    print(f"  {i}. {SCORES[row]:.0f} points: {excerpt[:100]}...")

fig = reviews_heatmap(plt, heatmap_questions, answers_for, split, review_rows)
display(fig)
plt.close(fig)
the five held-out heatmap columns:

  1. 80 points: Raw cherry and plum aromas are resiny and suggest wet cement. This is shearing and so jacked up with...
  2. 86 points: A slight spritz brightens the mouthfeel of this lemony wine. Aromas are a bit musky, but flavors of ...
  3. 89 points: This is a European-style Syrah, cofermented with 2% Viognier. It's soft and round, medium in body, a...
  4. 91 points: From the producer's dry-farmed estate vineyard, and supported by small amounts of Merlot and Caberne...
  5. 97 points: A thoroughly elegant, serious and yet immensely enjoyable wine that stays lively many days after ope...
output

页面顶部的表格,计算结果。所有五个选项都在相同的 800 个保留行上评分一次,前三个跳过特征发现。其中一个预测开发分数的均值,根本不从笔记中读取任何内容。其中一个通过其 text_features 处理将笔记交给同一个 CatBoost,将其转换为词计数。其中一个向 TypeSafe 询问分数本身。

第三项针对每一行提供了一个 Score,涵盖十个质量等级,从“缺陷或令人不悦”到“深刻”。分为十级是因为 Score 问题最多只支持十个等级——若设为十一级则会返回服务器错误。等级 0 对应 80 分,等级 9 对应 100 分。仅如此划分等级区间尚不充分,因为问题本身并未指明该出版物的评分在尺度中的实际位置。因此,每个答案都会根据开发集得分测量的单一偏移量进行调整。该偏移量显示在行标签中,且是本快捷方式仅从评分中习得的唯一要素。

斯皮尔曼相关系数衡量秩相关性,其中 1.0 表示保留集葡萄酒完全符合评论家的排序。字数行体现的是 CatBoost 自身的文本处理能力,而非经过调优的文本回归管道。以上所有内容均基于单个数据集和一次循环运行。

predicted = fit_predict(X, split)
text_predicted = fit_predict_text(split)

# ask TypeSafe for the score itself, one request per row
with ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=8) as pool:
    direct = list(pool.map(lambda note: ask_score(TYPESAFE_MODEL, note), NOTES))
asked = np.array([d["expected"] for d in direct])
shift = float(SCORES[DEV].mean() - asked[DEV].mean())  # one number, from the dev labels

# what one proposal call gets you, before any feedback: the set round 1 ended with
first_round, _ = design(snapshots[0], answers_for, ENCODING)

print(f"{'arm':<46}{'RMSE':>7}{'spearman':>10}")
for label, p in (
    ("predict the mean of the dev rows", np.full(len(TEST), SCORES[DEV].mean())),
    ("the note as word counts, same CatBoost", text_predicted),
    (f"ask for the score itself, shifted {shift:+.2f}", asked[TEST] + shift),
    (
        f"{len(snapshots[0])} questions from round 1, no loop",
        fit_predict(first_round, split),
    ),
    (f"{len(accepted)} questions after all {ROUNDS} rounds", predicted),
):
    print(f"{label:<46}{rmse(SCORES[TEST], p):>7.3f}{spearman(SCORES[TEST], p):>10.3f}")
arm                                              RMSE  spearman
predict the mean of the dev rows                3.088    -0.014
the note as word counts, same CatBoost          2.466     0.605
ask for the score itself, shifted -1.71         2.145     0.761
18 questions from round 1, no loop              1.869     0.778
38 questions after all 5 rounds                 1.772     0.799

自动研究轮次是否有帮助?

这两行分别绘制了每轮结束时问题集的误差,起始点为第一个提案。虚线表示交叉验证的开发集(dev)误差,即每次“接受”或“拒绝”决策所依据的数值。实线则在模型和循环从未见过的保留行(held-out rows)上对同一问题集进行评分。每个点代表该轮结束时的状态,因此即使某一轮仅修订或删除了问题,两条线仍会移动。特征映射说明了各问题衡量的是哪些维度;而误差则揭示了初始提案后的各轮迭代是否真正提升了预测效果。

坐标轴很紧:上面发生的所有事情都在五分之一的点内,上述表格中的所有捷径都远离其顶部。开发线始终高于保留线,这是一个训练大小效应。每个开发折用五分之四的开发行训练,而保留数字来自得到了所有 1,200 个样本的模型。两条线一起移动,因此循环指导的开发数字跟踪它从未见过的保留数字。标题下方的区间来自对保留行进行重采样,因此它说明了从第 1 轮到第 5 轮的移动是否大于 800 行中的噪声。

curve, per_round = [], []
for features in snapshots:
    X_round, _ = design(features, answers_for, ENCODING)
    per_round.append(fit_predict(X_round, split))
    curve.append((len(features), rmse(SCORES[TEST], per_round[-1])))

# the same held-out rows resampled 2,000 times, both arms scored on each resample
gain = paired_gain(SCORES[TEST], per_round[0], per_round[-1])
print(
    f"round 1 -> round {ROUNDS} on the held-out rows: {gain[0]:+.3f} points, "
    f"95% CI [{gain[1]:+.3f}, {gain[2]:+.3f}]"
)

fig = rounds_chart(plt, curve, history, len(TEST), gain)
display(fig)
plt.close(fig)
round 1 -> round 5 on the held-out rows: -0.097 points, 95% CI [-0.147, -0.050]
output

保留集曲线的下降幅度大于开发集。第一轮生成的问题没有任何反馈可供参考,其后的四轮在保留集行上提升了 0.10 分,95% 置信区间为 [-0.147, -0.050]。

第 5 轮提出了 4 个添加、2 个重写和 8 个删除,并给出了第一个没有改进的开发数字。关于一个 245 字符的笔记可问的内容有限,到第 5 轮时,提案已从添加问题转向删除问题。

kinds = {f["name"]: f["kind"] for f in accepted}
print("feature importance share: % of total CatBoost importance across all questions")
print(f"{'feature':<38}{'asked as':<10}{'importance share':>16}")
for name, importance_share in sorted(feature_importances.items(), key=lambda p: -p[1])[
    :12
]:
    kind = "score" if kinds[name] == "intensity" else "noul"
    print(
        f"{name[:36]:<38}{kind:<10}{importance_share:>8.1f}%  "
        f"{'#' * round(importance_share)}"
    )
counts = f"{sum(1 for k in kinds.values() if k == 'intensity')} score"
counts += f", {sum(1 for k in kinds.values() if k == 'presence')} noul"
print(f"\nthe {len(accepted)} questions the loop kept: {counts}")
top = max(feature_importances, key=feature_importances.get)
print(
    f'the question behind the top row:\n  {top}: "{owner_of(top, accepted)["question"]}"'
)
feature importance share: % of total CatBoost importance across all questions
feature                               asked as  importance share
note_overall_tone_positivity          score         17.4%  #################
savory_food_wine_seriousness          score          8.7%  #########
positive_superlative_language         score          8.4%  ########
single_vineyard_or_prestige_signal    noul           7.2%  #######
descriptive_detail_density            score          5.7%  ######
elegance_finesse_language             score          5.0%  #####
complexity                            score          5.0%  #####
aging_potential                       score          5.0%  #####
balance_harmony                       score          2.9%  ###
drinkability_easiness                 score          2.9%  ###
critic_enthusiasm_confidence          score          2.7%  ###
flavor_distinctiveness                score          2.6%  ###

the 38 questions the loop kept: 29 score, 9 noul
the question behind the top row:
  note_overall_tone_positivity: "Setting aside specific descriptors, how positive is the overall emotional tone and word choice of the note taken as a whole (warm, admiring language throughout vs. flat, neutral, or lukewarm phrasing)?"

importance share 是 CatBoost 特征重要性,归一化后 38 个问题总和为 100%。它不代表行、问题或预测准确率的占比。评分问题包含两个列(均值和分布范围),因此在打印百分比前会将这两列的重要性加总。note_overall_tone_positivity 占总重要性的 17.4%。第四行是一个 noul:笔记是否提及单一葡萄园或其他声望信号是一个是非事实,因此作为单一问题提出。

下一步

本次运行将循环规模保持精简。直接扩展方向:

  • 在付费解答候选问题前先进行筛选。将提出的问题本身作为状态,并询问 nouls:能否从源文本中解答、在其标准下含义是否唯一、是否适用于大多数行、在不同行之间是否存在差异。仅发送以足够置信度通过上述四项检查的问题。
  • 修剪相关特征。测量开发集各行中编码列之间的相关性,对近似重复项进行聚类,并从每个聚类中保留最清晰或最重要的问题。
  • 添加简单基线。独立比较 TF-IDF、字符计数及其他结构特征,然后将它们追加到已发现的列中,以衡量各自的贡献。
  • 混合不同来源的提出者。使用 Anthropic、OpenAI、Google Gemini 及开源模型生成候选批次,然后在任何内容到达 TypeSafe 之前进行合并与去重。不同的模型家族应比反复调用单一提出者更有效地扩大搜索范围。
  • 比较预测模型与方法。尝试线性回归或弹性网络回归、支持向量回归、随机森林,以及在下游输出为概率分布时进行重新校准。检查所发现的特征在 CatBoost 之外是否也有帮助。
  • 添加嵌入基线。嵌入将笔记转换为数百个数字,无需附加问题:sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2 可在本地运行,OpenAI 的 text-embedding-3-small 则为托管调用。将其追加到已发现的列中,并测量其是否包含了其他列未涵盖的信息。
  • 确保验证与部署相匹配。预测未来时使用时间顺序划分,当相关行需保持在一起时使用分组划分,并保留最终测试集不受特征发现和模型选择的影响。
  • 在平台期停止。当交叉验证 RMSE 在固定轮数内不再改善,或达到问题或请求预算限制时,结束循环。
  • 在 agent 的 Goal 模式下运行更长的搜索。为其提供明确的指标、预算和停止规则,然后让其提出、评估并优化更多轮次。
  • 检查稳定性。在不同随机种子或数据切片上重复发现过程,保留始终有用的问题,而非仅因某次划分而显得重要的问题。

Open it in the playground

此共享链接包含一条品鉴笔记以及循环最终确定的所有问题。

playground_link = make_playground_link(
    NOTES[0], feature_questions(accepted), models=[TYPESAFE_MODEL]
)
display(
    Markdown(
        f"🔗 [Open the note + questions in the TypeSafe playground]({playground_link})"
    )
)

在 TypeSafe playground 中打开笔记和问题 →