feat(example): add per-entity LLM evaluations for 985 WoN entities (S3.3)

Batch evaluation of all 988 entities via OpenRouter. 984 succeeded on
first pass; 3 failed (network errors). eval-summary --update-metrics
written with per_entity_mean=3.9556.

Viability dashboard: 6/6 PASS
  redundancy_ratio   0.0061  (max 0.10)
  coverage_ratio     0.6190  (min 0.40)
  coherence_comps    0.0000  (max 3)
  consistency_cycles 0.0000  (max 0)
  granularity_entropy 2.6748 (min 1.0)
  per_entity_mean    3.9556  (min 3.5)

Dimension breakdown (mean across 985 entities):
  definition_precision  3.62
  source_grounding      4.36
  domain_placement      4.56
  vsm_relevance         3.31
  explanatory_value     3.94

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-02-23 09:36:46 +01:00
parent 81a4c8796a
commit a9ca0adfcf
986 changed files with 63216 additions and 1 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
---
entity_slug: colonial_economic_potential
evaluator: null
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T04:47:01.178669'
overall_score: 3.8
scores:
- name: definition_precision
value: 3.0
max_value: 5.0
rationale: The definition captures a distinct concept of unrealized economic capacity,
but relies on somewhat vague terms like "optimal conditions" and "maximum economic
development" without precise criteria. The contrast with actual constrained development
provides some clarity, though the boundaries remain fuzzy.
- name: source_grounding
value: 4.0
max_value: 5.0
rationale: This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual arguments about colonial
restrictions and untapped potential in Book IV, Chapter 7. Smith explicitly discusses
how monopoly policies prevent colonies from achieving their natural prosperity
levels.
- name: domain_placement
value: 4.0
max_value: 5.0
rationale: '"General Theory" is appropriate as this concept represents a broad theoretical
principle about economic potential under different institutional arrangements.
It transcends specific policy mechanisms to address fundamental questions about
economic development.'
- name: vsm_relevance
value: 4.0
max_value: 5.0
rationale: This entity maps naturally to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation)
as it concerns the system's potential for responding to environmental opportunities
and adapting to maximize performance. It also relates to S5 regarding policy choices
that enable or constrain this potential.
- name: explanatory_value
value: 4.0
max_value: 5.0
rationale: The entity provides genuine explanatory power by illuminating the structural
relationship between institutional constraints and economic development outcomes.
It helps explain why colonies underperform relative to their resource endowments
and market access possibilities.
---
# Evaluation: Colonial Economic Potential
## definition_precision — 3.0 / 5.0
The definition captures a distinct concept of unrealized economic capacity, but relies on somewhat vague terms like "optimal conditions" and "maximum economic development" without precise criteria. The contrast with actual constrained development provides some clarity, though the boundaries remain fuzzy.
## source_grounding — 4.0 / 5.0
This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual arguments about colonial restrictions and untapped potential in Book IV, Chapter 7. Smith explicitly discusses how monopoly policies prevent colonies from achieving their natural prosperity levels.
## domain_placement — 4.0 / 5.0
"General Theory" is appropriate as this concept represents a broad theoretical principle about economic potential under different institutional arrangements. It transcends specific policy mechanisms to address fundamental questions about economic development.
## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0
This entity maps naturally to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) as it concerns the system's potential for responding to environmental opportunities and adapting to maximize performance. It also relates to S5 regarding policy choices that enable or constrain this potential.
## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0
The entity provides genuine explanatory power by illuminating the structural relationship between institutional constraints and economic development outcomes. It helps explain why colonies underperform relative to their resource endowments and market access possibilities.