docs(autotrain): continuous loop dc8878 — 5 screening cycles (non-positive) - #1485
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 44 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdded five continuous autotrain screening cycles for campaigns c1–c5. Each cycle includes JSON and Markdown fixture results, campaign documentation, checkpoint provenance, and an explicit non-ship status. ChangesContinuous autotrain screening
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
README.md (1)
796-825: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick winDisambiguate the repeated
## Continuous autotrain note (2026-08-08)headings. Both files add five sections dated 2026-08-08, one per campaign (c1-c5), all sharing the exact same heading text. markdownlint-cli2 flags this as MD024 (no-duplicate-heading) in both files.
README.md#L796-L825: append the campaign suffix to each heading, for example## Continuous autotrain note (2026-08-08, c1)throughc5.docs/MODEL_CARD.md#L1452-L1481: apply the same heading suffix pattern so headings stay unique and distinguishable by campaign.📝 Proposed fix (repeat for c2-c5 in both files)
-## Continuous autotrain note (2026-08-08) +## Continuous autotrain note (2026-08-08, c1)🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@README.md` around lines 796 - 825, Disambiguate the repeated “Continuous autotrain note (2026-08-08)” headings by appending each campaign suffix, changing c1 through c5 to headings ending “, c1” through “, c5”. Apply this to every corresponding heading in README.md (lines 796-825) and docs/MODEL_CARD.md (lines 1452-1481), leaving the campaign and checkpoint content unchanged.Source: Linters/SAST tools
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Nitpick comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Around line 796-825: Disambiguate the repeated “Continuous autotrain note
(2026-08-08)” headings by appending each campaign suffix, changing c1 through c5
to headings ending “, c1” through “, c5”. Apply this to every corresponding
heading in README.md (lines 796-825) and docs/MODEL_CARD.md (lines 1452-1481),
leaving the campaign and checkpoint content unchanged.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 08f3b2db-1972-478a-9ffe-a082806cf8a8
📒 Files selected for processing (13)
README.mddocs/MODEL_CARD.mddocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c1-results.jsondocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c1-results.mddocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c2-results.jsondocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c2-results.mddocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c3-results.jsondocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c3-results.mddocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c4-results.jsondocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c4-results.mddocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c5-results.jsondocs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c5-results.mdsrc/slm_training/resources/versions.json
…uous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c1 closeout
…uous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c2 closeout
…uous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c3 closeout
…uous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c4 closeout
…uous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c5 closeout
b2033ef to
90f0cdb
Compare
1 participant
Summary
Runs 5 supervised cycles of the
autotraincontinuous screening loop(loop-id
continuous-openui-scheduled-dc8878, fixturewf_smoke_v2,smoke.structural_similarityprimary metric) per theautotrain/sdlcautotrain-iteration-delivery contract. Each cycle self-healed astale
origin/mainancestry check and, once, a baredocumentversion-stamp gap, then closed out with committed evidence.
continuous-loop-20260808-...-c1— bounds vs control screen, fixtureship-gate reject (
structural_similarity=0.0575, insufficient n)....-c2— measurement incomplete (decode_timeout_count=3on botharms); infrastructure diagnosis, replay recommended before a new
hypothesis.
...-c3— bounds vs control screen, null primary-metric delta(
structural_similarity=0.1908unchanged), fixture ship-gate reject....-c4— component-plan arm measurement incomplete; control armcompleted but still gate-rejected (inconclusive).
...-c5— canvas vs control screen, fixture ship-gate reject(insufficient n).
Why no stacked positive-result PR
Per
autotrain-iteration-delivery.md, a stack layer opens only fora positive result (primary-metric win, ship-quality win, or proven
executable unblock). All 5 cycles here are fixture
insufficient_n,null primary-metric deltas, or measurement-incomplete timeouts —
explicitly not positive. This PR carries the iron-law documentation
and local incremental commits only; no
autotrain/<loop-id>-L0N-*stack layer was opened. The training loop continues from this commit on
the next scheduled iteration.
Changes
docs/design/continuous-loop-20260808-continuous-openui-schedu-32a7e28a-c{1..5}-results.{md,json}—measured-results evidence for each cycle (iron law).
docs/MODEL_CARD.md,README.md— honesty-stub continuous autotrainnotes recording fixture/scratch checkpoint provenance for each cycle
(explicitly not a ship promotion).
src/slm_training/resources/versions.json— matchingno-bump:history entries for
harness.experiments.slm228_spectral_disposition(its watch list includes README/MODEL_CARD; these are behavior-neutral
docs-only touches).
Test plan
python -m scripts.verify_version_stamps --checkpasses on everycommit (enforced by the repo's commit hook).
documenting-experiment-resultsiron law satisfied for all 5cycles (JSON + markdown under
docs/design/).suite required beyond the version-stamp/registry checks that ran
on commit.
Generated by Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit