docs: metrics methodology, collection-level tasks, and infospace tooling roadmap
Add METRICS-METHODOLOGY.md documenting the theoretical frameworks (SEQUAL, OntoClean, OOPS!, OntoQA, FCA, DSL principles) adapted for two-layer evaluation (LLM-Eval + deterministic aggregation) across five collection concerns: redundancy, coverage, coherence, consistency, and granularity balance. Extend INFRA-TASKS.md with assignment assessment (tasks 4-7), per-concept metrics (tasks 8-12), and collection-level metrics (tasks 13-19). Add roadmap/infospace-tooling/PLAN.md defining terminology (infospace, topic, discipline, entity, evaluation, viability) and a three-stage implementation plan: Stage 1 platform additions, Stage 2 infospace tooling layer, Stage 3 example revision. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
621
roadmap/infospace-tooling/PLAN.md
Normal file
621
roadmap/infospace-tooling/PLAN.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,621 @@
|
||||
# Viable Infospace Tooling — Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
## Vision
|
||||
|
||||
An **infospace** is a structured, evaluable, composable collection of
|
||||
concepts that explains a **topic** through the lens of one or more
|
||||
**disciplines**. Infospaces are the unit of knowledge work in MarkiTect.
|
||||
|
||||
This roadmap organises the work needed to move from the current
|
||||
ad-hoc example (`infospace-with-history`) to a general-purpose platform
|
||||
for creating, evaluating, maintaining, and composing infospaces.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Terminology
|
||||
|
||||
These terms establish the vocabulary for infospace tooling. They
|
||||
generalise from the Wealth of Nations / VSM example but are not
|
||||
specific to it.
|
||||
|
||||
### Infospace
|
||||
|
||||
A curated, self-describing collection of **entities** (concepts,
|
||||
mechanisms, observations) that together explain a **topic**. An
|
||||
infospace has:
|
||||
|
||||
- A **topic** — the subject matter being explained (e.g. "The Wealth
|
||||
of Nations", "cellular biology", "Kubernetes networking")
|
||||
- One or more **disciplines** — external frameworks applied as lenses
|
||||
(e.g. "Viable System Model", "category theory")
|
||||
- **Entities** — the atomic units of knowledge, each with a definition,
|
||||
provenance, and quality scores
|
||||
- **Schemas** — structural templates that define what a well-formed
|
||||
entity, mapping, or analysis looks like
|
||||
- **Evaluations** — per-entity and collection-level quality assessments
|
||||
- **Metrics** — quantitative indicators of completeness, coherence,
|
||||
consistency, and granularity balance
|
||||
|
||||
An infospace is **viable** when it meets threshold scores across its
|
||||
defined metrics — it is fit for purpose as an explanatory tool.
|
||||
|
||||
### Topic
|
||||
|
||||
The subject matter an infospace is built to explain. A topic sits
|
||||
within a **domain** (broader field of knowledge) but is more specific:
|
||||
|
||||
- Domain: Economics → Topic: The Wealth of Nations
|
||||
- Domain: Systems Theory → Topic: Viable System Model
|
||||
- Domain: Computer Science → Topic: Distributed consensus protocols
|
||||
|
||||
A topic provides the **source material** — the texts, data, or
|
||||
observations from which entities are extracted.
|
||||
|
||||
### Discipline
|
||||
|
||||
A reusable framework of concepts applied as a lens to explore a topic.
|
||||
A discipline is itself an infospace — one that has been evaluated as
|
||||
viable and packaged for reuse.
|
||||
|
||||
In our example, the VSM is the discipline: a set of concepts (S1-S5,
|
||||
recursion, variety, viability) from systems theory, applied to the
|
||||
economic concepts in Smith's work.
|
||||
|
||||
**Key property:** Disciplines compose. An infospace built with one
|
||||
discipline can itself become a discipline for another infospace. The
|
||||
Wealth of Nations infospace, viewed through VSM, could become a
|
||||
discipline applied to a modern supply chain analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
### Entity
|
||||
|
||||
The atomic unit of an infospace. An entity has:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Identity**: a unique slug and human-readable title
|
||||
- **Definition**: a precise, non-circular explanation
|
||||
- **Provenance**: the source chapter, passage, and extraction context
|
||||
- **Domain placement**: which area of the topic it belongs to
|
||||
- **Discipline mapping**: how it connects to the applied discipline
|
||||
(e.g. which VSM system)
|
||||
- **Quality scores**: per-entity LLM-evaluated metrics
|
||||
- **Lifecycle state**: active, archived (with reason), or draft
|
||||
|
||||
### Evaluation
|
||||
|
||||
A structured assessment of quality, applied at two levels:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Per-entity evaluation**: scores an individual entity against
|
||||
quality rubrics defined in its schema (definition precision, source
|
||||
grounding, discipline relevance, etc.)
|
||||
- **Collection evaluation**: scores the entity set as a whole against
|
||||
five concerns: redundancy, coverage, coherence, consistency, and
|
||||
granularity balance
|
||||
|
||||
Evaluations are always performed by **delegated LLM calls** through
|
||||
MarkiTect's LLM integration — never by the coding agent working on
|
||||
infrastructure. This separation ensures that domain-level judgment
|
||||
stays in the problem space, not the tooling space.
|
||||
|
||||
### Viability
|
||||
|
||||
An infospace is viable when:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Its entities individually meet quality thresholds (per-entity eval)
|
||||
2. Its collection metrics are within acceptable ranges
|
||||
3. It can answer its defined **competency questions** — the canonical
|
||||
queries the infospace is meant to support
|
||||
4. It has been evaluated recently enough that metrics reflect current
|
||||
content
|
||||
|
||||
Viability is not binary — it is a profile of scores that the user
|
||||
sets thresholds for based on their needs.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Architecture: Three Layers
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ Layer 3: Infospace Instances │
|
||||
│ Specific infospaces built by users │
|
||||
│ (Wealth of Nations + VSM, supply chain + ...) │
|
||||
│ Works IN an infospace │
|
||||
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
|
||||
│ Layer 2: Infospace Tooling │
|
||||
│ Terminology, primitives, composition model │
|
||||
│ CLI: infospace create/evaluate/compose/... │
|
||||
│ Works WITH infospaces │
|
||||
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
|
||||
│ Layer 1: MarkiTect Platform │
|
||||
│ Artifacts, prompts, LLM, spaces, graph, embed │
|
||||
│ Provides FOR infospaces │
|
||||
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Boundary condition: LLM delegation
|
||||
|
||||
All LLM-based evaluation (entity scoring, pairwise judgments, coverage
|
||||
analysis) is delegated to MarkiTect's LLM integration module. The coding
|
||||
agent that works on infrastructure never makes domain-level judgments
|
||||
itself. This keeps a clean separation:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Coding agent** → writes Python, templates, schemas, tests
|
||||
- **MarkiTect LLM** → evaluates entities, judges redundancy, assesses
|
||||
coverage, checks consistency
|
||||
|
||||
The infospace tooling (Layer 2) orchestrates these LLM calls through
|
||||
prompt templates and the prompt execution engine, not through ad-hoc
|
||||
prompting.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Stage 1: MarkiTect Platform Additions
|
||||
|
||||
Infrastructure that must exist before infospace tooling can be built.
|
||||
These are general-purpose platform capabilities, not infospace-specific.
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.1 — Entity metadata parser
|
||||
|
||||
Add a deterministic markdown parser that extracts structured metadata
|
||||
from entity files: H1 title, sections present, word counts, domain,
|
||||
source chapter. Returns a dataclass usable by all downstream metrics.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #13, #10
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/prompts/quality/` or new `markitect/analysis/`
|
||||
**Depends on:** Nothing — can start immediately
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `parse_entity_metadata(path) -> EntityMeta` function
|
||||
with tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.2 — Schema compliance validator
|
||||
|
||||
Deterministic validation of entity/mapping files against their schemas:
|
||||
section presence, word count ranges, heading format, enum values. No
|
||||
LLM needed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #10
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/prompts/quality/validator.py` (extend existing)
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `validate_document(path, schema) -> ValidationResult`
|
||||
with tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.3 — Embedding adapter
|
||||
|
||||
Add embedding support to `markitect/llm/`. Needs:
|
||||
|
||||
- `EmbeddingAdapter` interface: `embed(texts: list[str]) -> list[list[float]]`
|
||||
- `OpenRouterEmbeddingAdapter` implementation (or OpenAI embedding endpoint)
|
||||
- Caching layer: store embeddings keyed by `{slug: content_digest}` so
|
||||
unchanged entities skip re-embedding
|
||||
- Cosine similarity utility: `similarity_matrix(embeddings) -> np.ndarray`
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #14 (prerequisite)
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/llm/embeddings.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** Nothing — can start immediately
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Embedding adapter + cache + similarity computation, with
|
||||
tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.4 — Graph analysis utilities
|
||||
|
||||
The existing `DependencyGraph` supports basic traversal and cycle
|
||||
detection. Collection-level metrics need richer analysis:
|
||||
|
||||
- Connected components
|
||||
- Betweenness centrality
|
||||
- Community detection (Louvain or label propagation)
|
||||
- Modularity score
|
||||
- Degree distribution
|
||||
- Cohesion/coupling computation
|
||||
|
||||
Decide: extend `DependencyGraph` or add a lightweight wrapper that
|
||||
converts to networkx (adding it as an optional dependency).
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #16 (prerequisite)
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/prompts/dependencies/analysis.py` or new
|
||||
`markitect/analysis/graph.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** Nothing — can start immediately
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Graph analysis functions with tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.5 — Structured evaluation output
|
||||
|
||||
Define a standard format for evaluation results: YAML front-matter +
|
||||
markdown body. Add utilities for:
|
||||
|
||||
- Writing evaluation results (per-entity, per-pair, collection-level)
|
||||
- Reading/parsing evaluation results back into dataclasses
|
||||
- Appending timestamped snapshots to a history file
|
||||
- Diffing two snapshots
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #11, #12
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/prompts/quality/` or `markitect/analysis/`
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `EvaluationResult` model + read/write utilities with
|
||||
tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.6 — Batch LLM evaluation orchestrator
|
||||
|
||||
A pipeline component that runs an evaluation prompt template against a
|
||||
batch of entities (or entity pairs), collecting structured results.
|
||||
Must handle:
|
||||
|
||||
- Rate limiting and retry (reuse existing adapter logic)
|
||||
- Progress reporting
|
||||
- Incremental evaluation (skip entities whose content hasn't changed
|
||||
since last eval)
|
||||
- Result aggregation
|
||||
|
||||
This is the mechanism by which infospace tooling delegates LLM work
|
||||
to the platform.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #9 (prerequisite)
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/prompts/execution/batch.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.5
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `BatchEvaluator` class with tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S1.7 — FCA computation
|
||||
|
||||
Formal Concept Analysis: build a formal context (entity × attribute
|
||||
matrix), compute the concept lattice, extract gap concepts. Either
|
||||
implement a minimal FCA algorithm or integrate a library.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #15 (prerequisite)
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/analysis/fca.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `FormalContext`, `ConceptLattice`, `find_gap_concepts()`
|
||||
with tests
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary: Stage 1 dependency graph
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
S1.1 Entity metadata parser ──┬── S1.2 Schema validator
|
||||
├── S1.5 Eval output format ── S1.6 Batch evaluator
|
||||
└── S1.7 FCA computation
|
||||
|
||||
S1.3 Embedding adapter ──────── (independent)
|
||||
S1.4 Graph analysis ─────────── (independent)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
S1.1, S1.3, and S1.4 can proceed in parallel. S1.6 (batch evaluator) is
|
||||
the final piece needed before Stage 2 can begin.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Stage 2: Infospace Tooling
|
||||
|
||||
The user-facing layer that provides documented primitives for working
|
||||
with infospaces. Built on top of Stage 1 infrastructure and the existing
|
||||
`markitect/spaces/` module.
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.1 — Infospace model and configuration
|
||||
|
||||
Define the `Infospace` as a first-class concept that extends the existing
|
||||
`InformationSpace` with:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Topic declaration**: name, domain, source material reference
|
||||
- **Discipline bindings**: which external infospaces are applied as lenses
|
||||
- **Schema registry**: which schemas govern entity structure
|
||||
- **Competency questions**: what the infospace should be able to answer
|
||||
- **Viability thresholds**: minimum acceptable metric scores
|
||||
- **Evaluation state**: latest per-entity and collection scores
|
||||
|
||||
Configuration format: a `infospace.yaml` (or section in existing config)
|
||||
that declares all of the above.
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** new `markitect/infospace/` package
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.1, S1.5, existing `markitect/spaces/`
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `InfospaceConfig`, `InfospaceState` models + loader
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.2 — Infospace lifecycle commands
|
||||
|
||||
CLI commands for the core lifecycle:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Initialise a new infospace
|
||||
markitect infospace init --topic "Wealth of Nations" \
|
||||
--domain "Economics" \
|
||||
--discipline vsm-framework
|
||||
|
||||
# Show infospace status (entity count, eval state, viability)
|
||||
markitect infospace status
|
||||
|
||||
# List entities with quality summary
|
||||
markitect infospace entities [--sort-by score|domain|chapter]
|
||||
|
||||
# Show viability dashboard
|
||||
markitect infospace viability
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
These commands read the `infospace.yaml` config and present information
|
||||
from the metadata index and evaluation results.
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/infospace/cli.py` integrated into main CLI
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** CLI commands with help text and tests
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.3 — Per-entity evaluation primitives
|
||||
|
||||
Prompt templates and CLI commands for evaluating individual entities:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Evaluate all entities
|
||||
markitect infospace evaluate --provider openrouter
|
||||
|
||||
# Evaluate entities from a specific chapter
|
||||
markitect infospace evaluate --chapter book-1-chapter-05 --provider openrouter
|
||||
|
||||
# Re-evaluate a single entity
|
||||
markitect infospace evaluate --entity division-of-labour --provider openrouter
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Uses the batch evaluator (S1.6) to run the evaluate-entity prompt
|
||||
template (defined in the infospace's schema directory) against entities.
|
||||
Writes structured results to `output/evaluations/`.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #8, #9
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/infospace/evaluation.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.6, S2.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Per-entity evaluation pipeline + CLI + prompt template
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.4 — Collection-level checks
|
||||
|
||||
CLI commands for each of the five collection concerns:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Run all collection checks
|
||||
markitect infospace check --provider openrouter
|
||||
|
||||
# Run specific checks
|
||||
markitect infospace check redundancy --provider openrouter
|
||||
markitect infospace check coverage --provider openrouter
|
||||
markitect infospace check coherence --provider openrouter
|
||||
markitect infospace check consistency --provider openrouter
|
||||
markitect infospace check granularity --provider openrouter
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Each check uses Stage 1 infrastructure (embeddings, graph analysis, FCA)
|
||||
and delegates LLM judgment to the platform. Results written to
|
||||
`output/metrics/` as per-concern reports + unified `metrics.yaml`.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #14-19
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/infospace/checks/` (one module per concern)
|
||||
**Depends on:** S1.3, S1.4, S1.6, S1.7, S2.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Five check modules + unified orchestrator + CLI
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.5 — Metrics history and viability tracking
|
||||
|
||||
Track metrics over time. After each evaluation or check run, append a
|
||||
timestamped snapshot to `metrics-history.yaml`. Provide commands to
|
||||
review trends:
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Show metrics history
|
||||
markitect infospace history
|
||||
|
||||
# Compare two snapshots
|
||||
markitect infospace history diff 2026-02-18 2026-03-01
|
||||
|
||||
# Check viability against thresholds
|
||||
markitect infospace viability
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Viability is assessed by comparing current metrics to the thresholds
|
||||
declared in `infospace.yaml`. A simple pass/fail per metric with the
|
||||
actual value.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #12
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/infospace/history.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.4, S1.5
|
||||
**Deliverable:** History tracking + viability assessment + CLI
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.6 — Infospace composition model
|
||||
|
||||
The mechanism by which one infospace is applied as a discipline to
|
||||
another. Builds on `markitect/spaces/composability/`:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Discipline binding**: declare that infospace A uses infospace B as a
|
||||
discipline. B's entities become available as mapping targets.
|
||||
- **Cross-infospace references**: entity in A maps to concept in B using
|
||||
the same mapping schema and evaluation pipeline.
|
||||
- **Discipline viability requirement**: B must be viable (meets its own
|
||||
thresholds) before it can be used as a discipline for A.
|
||||
- **Cascading evaluation**: when B's entities change, A's mappings that
|
||||
reference them are flagged for re-evaluation.
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Bind a discipline to the current infospace
|
||||
markitect infospace bind-discipline ./path/to/vsm-infospace
|
||||
|
||||
# List bound disciplines and their viability
|
||||
markitect infospace disciplines
|
||||
|
||||
# Check for stale mappings after discipline update
|
||||
markitect infospace check stale-mappings
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** `markitect/infospace/composition.py`
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.1, existing `markitect/spaces/composability/`
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Composition model + CLI + documentation
|
||||
|
||||
### S2.7 — Documentation: Infospace Primitives Reference
|
||||
|
||||
A reference document explaining all primitives, their purpose, and how
|
||||
they compose. This is the user-facing documentation for the infospace
|
||||
tooling layer — the equivalent of a framework guide.
|
||||
|
||||
**Location:** `docs/infospace-primitives.md` or in-CLI help
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.1-S2.6
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Reference documentation
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary: Stage 2 dependency graph
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
S2.1 Model & config ──┬── S2.2 Lifecycle CLI
|
||||
├── S2.3 Per-entity evaluation
|
||||
├── S2.4 Collection checks ── S2.5 History & viability
|
||||
└── S2.6 Composition model
|
||||
|
||||
S2.7 Documentation (depends on all above)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Stage 3: Example Revision
|
||||
|
||||
Revisit the Wealth of Nations / VSM example using the new tooling.
|
||||
The example becomes both a tutorial and a validation of the tooling.
|
||||
|
||||
### S3.1 — Migrate example to infospace configuration
|
||||
|
||||
Replace the ad-hoc `process_chapters.py` setup with a declarative
|
||||
`infospace.yaml`:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
topic:
|
||||
name: "The Wealth of Nations"
|
||||
domain: "Classical Economics"
|
||||
sources: artifacts/sources/
|
||||
|
||||
disciplines:
|
||||
- name: "Viable System Model"
|
||||
path: artifacts/vsm-reference/
|
||||
|
||||
schemas:
|
||||
entity: schemas/economic-entity-schema-v1.0.md
|
||||
mapping: schemas/vsm-mapping-schema-v1.0.md
|
||||
analysis: schemas/chapter-analysis-schema-v1.0.md
|
||||
|
||||
competency_questions: schemas/competency-questions.md
|
||||
|
||||
viability:
|
||||
redundancy_ratio: { max: 0.05 }
|
||||
coverage_ratio: { min: 0.60 }
|
||||
coherence_components: { max: 1 }
|
||||
consistency_cycles: { max: 0 }
|
||||
granularity_entropy: { min: 1.0 }
|
||||
per_entity_mean: { min: 3.5 }
|
||||
|
||||
pipeline:
|
||||
stages:
|
||||
- template: extract-entities
|
||||
spaces: [sources, guidelines, vsm-reference, entities]
|
||||
- template: map-to-vsm
|
||||
spaces: [entities, vsm-reference, guidelines]
|
||||
- template: synthesize-analysis
|
||||
spaces: [sources, entities, mappings, vsm-reference]
|
||||
post_batch:
|
||||
- template: assess-metrics
|
||||
spaces: [analyses, vsm-reference]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** `infospace.yaml` + migration of `process_chapters.py` to
|
||||
use infospace tooling APIs
|
||||
|
||||
### S3.2 — Clean per-chapter git history
|
||||
|
||||
Re-run all processed chapters (and remaining ones) with per-chapter
|
||||
commits on a clean branch, then replace the current tangled history.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #4, #7
|
||||
**Depends on:** S3.1
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Clean branch with one commit per chapter
|
||||
|
||||
### S3.3 — Full evaluation run
|
||||
|
||||
Run all per-entity evaluations and collection checks on the completed
|
||||
infospace. Establish baseline metrics. Demonstrate the viability
|
||||
dashboard.
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to:** INFRA-TASKS #6
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.3, S2.4, S2.5, S3.2
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Complete evaluation results + viability report
|
||||
|
||||
### S3.4 — Rewrite tutorial
|
||||
|
||||
Update `TUTORIAL.md` to use infospace tooling commands instead of
|
||||
raw `process_chapters.py` invocations. The tutorial should walk
|
||||
through:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Initialising an infospace (`markitect infospace init`)
|
||||
2. Defining schemas and competency questions
|
||||
3. Processing chapters (pipeline execution)
|
||||
4. Evaluating entities (`markitect infospace evaluate`)
|
||||
5. Running collection checks (`markitect infospace check`)
|
||||
6. Reviewing viability (`markitect infospace viability`)
|
||||
7. Iterating: refining guidelines, re-processing, re-evaluating
|
||||
8. Using the infospace as a discipline for a new project
|
||||
|
||||
**Depends on:** S3.1-S3.3
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Revised `TUTORIAL.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### S3.5 — Demonstrate composition
|
||||
|
||||
Create a minimal second infospace (e.g. a modern supply chain case
|
||||
study or a different economic text) that binds the Wealth of Nations
|
||||
infospace as a discipline. Demonstrates the composition model from S2.6.
|
||||
|
||||
**Depends on:** S2.6, S3.3
|
||||
**Deliverable:** Second example infospace + composition tutorial section
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Task Mapping
|
||||
|
||||
Cross-reference between INFRA-TASKS numbers and roadmap stages:
|
||||
|
||||
| INFRA-TASK | Description | Stage |
|
||||
|------------|-------------|-------|
|
||||
| 1-3 | Infra fixes (resolved) | — |
|
||||
| 4 | Per-chapter git history | S3.2 |
|
||||
| 5 | Prompt file side-effects | S1.6 (batch eval avoids this) |
|
||||
| 6 | Stale metrics | S3.3 |
|
||||
| 7 | Remaining 28 chapters | S3.2 |
|
||||
| 8 | Per-concept quality metrics in schema | S2.3 |
|
||||
| 9 | Evaluate-entity prompt template | S2.3 |
|
||||
| 10 | Deterministic schema compliance | S1.2 |
|
||||
| 11 | Structured metrics output | S1.5 |
|
||||
| 12 | Metrics-over-time tracking | S2.5 |
|
||||
| 13 | Entity metadata index | S1.1 |
|
||||
| 14 | Redundancy detection (C1) | S2.4 |
|
||||
| 15 | Coverage completeness (C2) | S2.4 |
|
||||
| 16 | Structural coherence (C3) | S2.4 |
|
||||
| 17 | Definitional consistency (C4) | S2.4 |
|
||||
| 18 | Granularity balance (C5) | S2.4 |
|
||||
| 19 | Unified collection evaluation | S2.4 |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Order
|
||||
|
||||
Recommended sequence, accounting for dependencies and value delivery:
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase A — Foundation (Stage 1, parallelisable)**
|
||||
1. S1.1 Entity metadata parser
|
||||
2. S1.3 Embedding adapter
|
||||
3. S1.4 Graph analysis utilities
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase B — Validation & Output (Stage 1)**
|
||||
4. S1.2 Schema compliance validator (needs S1.1)
|
||||
5. S1.5 Structured evaluation output (needs S1.1)
|
||||
6. S1.7 FCA computation (needs S1.1)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase C — Orchestration (Stage 1 → Stage 2 bridge)**
|
||||
7. S1.6 Batch LLM evaluation orchestrator (needs S1.5)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase D — Infospace Core (Stage 2)**
|
||||
8. S2.1 Infospace model and configuration
|
||||
9. S2.2 Lifecycle commands
|
||||
10. S2.3 Per-entity evaluation primitives (needs S1.6, S2.1)
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase E — Collection Intelligence (Stage 2)**
|
||||
11. S2.4 Collection-level checks (needs S1.3, S1.4, S1.7, S2.1)
|
||||
12. S2.5 Metrics history and viability tracking
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase F — Composition (Stage 2)**
|
||||
13. S2.6 Infospace composition model
|
||||
14. S2.7 Documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Phase G — Example (Stage 3)**
|
||||
15. S3.1 Migrate example to infospace config
|
||||
16. S3.2 Clean per-chapter history
|
||||
17. S3.3 Full evaluation run
|
||||
18. S3.4 Rewrite tutorial
|
||||
19. S3.5 Demonstrate composition
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user