TS TypeSafe 文档中文版 原文 ↗

自动研究式特征发现

运行一个自动研究循环:它提出 TypeSafe 问题、把自由文本转换成数值特征,并利用模型的误差来改进一个有监督的 CatBoost 回归器。

TypeSafe 问题把自由文本变成有监督 CatBoost 模型可用的数值特征; 用一个自动研究循环来发现它们。

CatBoost 需要一张数字表格,而一条品酒笔记并不是数字表格。这本实践手册用关于这条笔记的 问题来搭建那张表格,而且这些问题没有一个是手写的。由大语言模型(LLM)提出问题, TypeSafe 为每一行回答这些问题,CatBoost 再在这些答案上训练。自动研究是接下来发生的 部分:CatBoost 报告它用到了哪些问题、还有哪些行它仍然预测错误,下一次提议调用会读取 这份报告,然后循环再次运行。

到最后你会得到一个可以指向你自己带标注文本的循环、一条每轮留出误差的曲线,以及一张 说明最终模型最常用哪些问题的表格。

text
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 Score 答案会变成两列:答案所指向的平均等级,以及它围绕该平均值的离散程度。一个 Noul 答案就是一个概率,所以它是一列。

数据是 2,000 条葡萄酒评论:输入一条品酒笔记,输出评论家在 80-100 分制上给出的分数。 RMSE 以评论家评分的点为单位衡量预测误差,偏差越大计入的权重越高,越低越好。下表中 的每个数字都来自模型和循环都从未见过的 800 条评论。

笔记如何变成一个分数 RMSE
预测训练行的平均分 3.09
同一个 CatBoost,把笔记当作词频来读 2.47
直接向 TypeSafe 询问分数本身,再重新缩放并平移 2.15
一次提议调用得到的 18 个问题,不跑循环 1.87
循环五轮之后的 38 个问题 1.77

最后两行才是循环。一次提议调用,在还没有任何可依据的信息时达到 1.87。再经过四轮读取 它自己最差的预测,达到 1.77。大部分收益来自第一次调用,而其后四轮究竟额外带来多少, 会在下面测量。

提示

想把这份 notebook 继续做下去,或者把它应用到另一个问题上?请看 后续步骤。

python
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
 

环境准备

bash
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。每次 API 调用都会缓存到 json_cache.json,该文件随实践手册一起提供,因此重新渲染时会直接重放这些数字, 不会调用任何接口。删掉它即可重新实际运行。这些数字来自 2026-08-03 的 TypeSafe jev-1.12 和 claude-sonnet-5。propose() 还有一个针对 gpt-5.6-luna 的分支, 但那一路没有运行。

第一个代码单元就是全部实现:API 调用、编码方式、指标、图表样式。它放在那里是为了让 这个文件能独立运行,文档站点会把它折叠起来。首次阅读时可以跳过它——配方从它下面开始。

python
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]}")
 
text
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 行中同样的那 1,200 行(dev 行),只要一个问题有助于预测这 1,200 个 分数,就把它保留下来。在同一批行上评分,主要衡量的只是循环把自己拟合到这些行上的程度, 所以另外 800 行被留出,只在最后评分一次。

两种问题类型

一个被提出的问题属于两类之一,而类型决定了返回什么数字。

  • intensity 会变成一个 Score,适用于任何有程度之分的东西。它的五个等级在下面 打印出来,而该列是平均等级,所以一条介于 "moderate" 和 "strongly" 之间的笔记,结果 就落在两者之间。
  • presence 会变成一个 Noul,适用于像是否点出了某个缺陷这样的是/否事实。 该列就是那一个概率。

方法

text
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
 

没有任何问题会在被回答之前先被筛掉。一轮里的所有问题都在同一个请求中发出,所以多一个 问题不会多花一个请求。一个只对十行中的一行适用的问题,在提议者读到的那 60 条笔记里 会显得毫无用处,却仍可能是整个集合中最有用的一列。

k-fold 指的是把 dev 行切成 k 份,并用在其余部分上训练的模型来预测每一份。这些预测有 三项作用:它们评判每一次修改和删除,它们挑选下一轮要读的笔记,它们还告诉提议者哪些问题 起了作用——依据是这些问题自上一轮以来移动了多少。

python
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  ...")
 
text
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 会跑完这五轮,并每轮打印一个区块。新增的问题会直接进入集合:它的答案已经 取回,而它的重要性之后会显示它是否值得一问。一次修改或一次删除会拿掉模型已经在用的 一列,所以每一个都会先试一遍:带着改动重新拟合,只有当 dev 误差下降时才保留它。重新 拟合不消耗 API 调用,因此尝试一个改动再拒绝它是免费的。

python
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
 
plaintext
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
 

把它指向你自己的数据

PROPOSER_TASK 是唯一提到葡萄酒的字符串,而 featurize() 接受任意字符串列表。编辑 那段说明会改变提议提示词,而提示词是缓存键的一部分,所以下一次运行会对每一轮重新调用 API。

请求数量随行数增长,而不是随问题数增长:每轮每行一个请求,所以 100,000 行就是每轮 100,000 个请求。一次修改算作一个新问题,因此它会再对所有行做一遍。慢慢提高工作线程池 的大小。在共享 key 上,8 个就已经足以触发限流了。

问题能看到什么

五条留出的评论,分别位于分数区间的每个四分之一处,与 38 个问题中的 15 个对照:按重要性 排出的前八个 score 问题,加上前七个 noul。

这十五行随后按答案随评论家评分移动的方向排序。答案随分数上升的问题排在前面,答案随分数 下降的问题排在那条分隔线之后。因此从左到右、从最差的评论到最好的评论,分隔线上方的答案 应当攀升,分隔线下方的答案应当下降。

python
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)
 
text
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...
 
输出

页面顶部的那张表,是计算出来的。全部五条对照臂都在同一批 800 个留出行上评分一次,而 前三条跳过了特征发现。一条预测 dev 分数的均值,完全不从笔记中读取任何信息。一条通过 CatBoost 自己的 text_features 处理把笔记交给同一个 CatBoost,这会把它变成词频。 一条直接向 TypeSafe 询问分数本身。

第三条是对每行用一个 Score,跨越十个质量档位,从 "faulty or unpleasant" 一直到 "profound"。之所以是十个,是因为十个等级是一个 Score 问题能承受的上限—— 十一个会以服务器错误返回。等级 0 映射到 80 分,等级 9 映射到 100 分。仅仅把档位这样 铺在量表上还不够,因为问题里没有任何东西说明这家媒体的分数实际落在量表的哪个位置。 所以每个答案随后再被一个单一的偏移量平移,该偏移量是在 dev 分数上测得的。这个偏移量 打印在行标签里,而它是这条捷径唯一从分数中学到的东西。

Spearman 是等级相关,取 1.0 意味着把留出的酒完全排成评论家的顺序。词频那一行是 CatBoost 自带的文本处理,而不是调优过的文本回归流水线。所有这些都来自一个数据集和 循环的一次运行。

python
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}")
 
text
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
 

自动研究的这些轮有帮助吗?

两条线都画出每轮结束时问题集合的误差,起点是第一次提议。虚线是交叉验证的 dev 误差, 也就是每一次接受或拒绝决策所依据的那个数字。实线是在留出行上给同一个问题集合评分, 而循环从不读取这些行。每个点都是该轮结束时的集合状态,所以一轮哪怕只是修改或删除了 一个问题,两条线也仍然会移动。特征图说明问题在测量什么;误差则告诉你第一次提议之后的 那些轮是否让预测变得更好了。

坐标轴的范围很窄:轴上发生的一切都在五分之一个点之内,而上面表格里的每一条捷径都远在 它的上方。dev 线全程都在留出线之上,这是一个训练规模效应。每个 dev 折只在五分之四的 dev 行上训练,而留出的数字来自一个拿到了全部 1,200 行的模型。两条线一起移动,所以循环 用来掌舵的 dev 数字,能跟上它从未见过的那个留出数字。标题下方的区间来自对留出行重新 采样,因此它说明的是从第 1 轮到第 5 轮的移动是否大于 800 行中的噪声。

python
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)
 
text
round 1 -> round 5 on the held-out rows: -0.097 points, 95% CI [-0.147, -0.050]
 
输出

留出线下降得比 dev 线更多。第 1 轮在没有任何反馈可依据的情况下写下了它的问题,而其后 四轮在留出行上值 0.10 个点,95% 置信区间 [-0.147, -0.050]。

第 5 轮提出了四处新增、两处改写和八处删除,并给出了第一个没有改善的 dev 数字。关于一条 245 个字符的笔记,能问的东西就那么多,而到第 5 轮时,提议已经从增加问题转向删除问题。

python
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"]}"'
)
 
text
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 的特征重要性,经过归一化,使全部 38 个问题加起来为 100%。它不是行数的占比、问题的占比或预测准确率的占比。一个 score 问题拥有两列,一个 均值和一个离散度,所以它的两个列重要性会在打印百分比之前加回到一起。 note_overall_tone_positivity 占总量的 17.4%。第四行是一个 noul:笔记是否点出了单一 葡萄园或某种其他声望信号,是一个是/否事实,所以它就是这样被问的。

后续步骤

这次运行把循环保持得很小。可以直接做的扩展:

  • 在花钱回答一个候选问题之前先筛掉它。把被提出的问题本身当作状态,就它提出 noul: 它能否从源文本中得到回答,它在自己的 criteria 下是否只有一个含义,它是否适用于 大多数行,它是否会因行而异。只把四条全部以足够置信度通过的问题发出去。
  • 剪掉相关的特征。在 dev 行上测量编码后各列之间的相关性,把近乎重复的聚成一类, 再从每个类中保留最清晰或最重要的那个问题。
  • 加入简单的基线。单独比较 TF-IDF、字符计数和其他结构性特征,然后把它们追加到发现出的 列上,以衡量各自贡献了什么。
  • 混合不同家族的提议者。用 Anthropic、OpenAI、Google Gemini 和开源模型分别生成候选 批次,然后在它们中的任何一个到达 TypeSafe 之前先合并并去重。不同家族应当比反复调用 同一个提议者更能拓宽搜索。
  • 比较预测模型和方法。试试线性回归或弹性网回归、支持向量回归器、随机森林,以及在下游 输出是概率时的重新校准。检查发现出的特征在 CatBoost 之外是否也有帮助。
  • 加入一个嵌入基线。嵌入会把一条笔记变成几百个数字,而不附带任何问题: sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2 可以在本地运行,OpenAI 的 text-embedding-3-small 则是一次托管调用。把一个嵌入追加到发现出的列上,衡量它是否 带来了这些列所没有的信息。
  • 让验证方式与部署方式匹配。在预测未来时使用按时间顺序的切分,在相关的行必须留在一起时 使用分组切分,并保留一个既不被特征发现、也不被模型选择碰过的最终测试集。
  • 在平台期停下。当交叉验证 RMSE 在固定轮数内不再改善时结束循环,或者在它达到某个问题 预算或请求预算时结束。
  • 在 agent 的 Goal 模式下做更长时间的搜索。给它一个明确的指标、预算和停止规则,然后让 它提议、评估并改进更多轮。
  • 检查稳定性。跨不同随机种子或数据切片重复做发现,保留那些始终有用的问题,而不是重要 性依赖于某一次切分的问题。

在 playground 中打开

这个分享链接包含一条品酒笔记,以及循环最终得到的所有问题。

python
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 中打开这条笔记 + 这些问题 →