Skip to content

Derived vocabularies drop relations for rarely stated facts (the 25:50 personal best) #440

Description

@antejavor

Question

Does a derivation keep a relation for a fact that the user states only rarely? The test case is 25:50, the user's personal best.

Where it stands

The value-only pass decided in #386 fixed the typing: 25:50 is now Duration in both derived seeds. No edge lands on it, though, because neither derived vocabulary keeps a relation for it:

  • S1 proposed improved_personal_best_by and race_finish_time from the one propose-sample session that mentions a personal best.
  • The 60-session observe sample has no instance of either, so prune dropped both.
  • S2 never proposed one.

Evidence: read_value_pass.py and read_value_pass.log on prototype/gliner2-constrained-edges (c07155a).

Why it's left open

We expect the derivation schedule (#433) to cover this, but haven't shown it. Each run reads the user's own delta, so the session that states the fact is in the data that gets observed. The held-out evaluation excludes those sessions on purpose. This issue is intentionally open to reconsider once the build lands. Ways to check:

If it doesn't hold, the levers are:

  • A lower evidence floor for relations whose intended tail is a core value type.
  • Keeping a proposed value relation in the pool rather than dropping it.

No activity

Activity on this issue will appear here.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions