Files

tegwick a9ca0adfcf 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>

2026-02-23 09:36:46 +01:00

3.2 KiB

Raw Blame History

entity_slug, evaluator, evaluated_at, overall_score, scores

entity_slug

evaluator

evaluated_at

overall_score

scores

economic_system_mechanism

null

2026-02-23T05:18:41.111398

2.6

name	value	max_value	rationale
definition_precision	2.0	5.0	The definition is overly broad and circular, essentially defining "mechanism" as "processes and methods through which things function." It lacks the precision needed to distinguish this concept from general economic processes or systems themselves.

name	value	max_value	rationale
source_grounding	2.0	5.0	While Smith does discuss different economic systems and their operations, this entity appears to be a modern analytical abstraction rather than a concept Smith explicitly articulates. The reference to "Book IV, Chapter 0" is also problematic as chapters typically don't start at zero.

name	value	max_value	rationale
domain_placement	3.0	5.0	"General Theory" is appropriate given the broad, meta-analytical nature of this concept. However, the entity is so abstract that it doesn't clearly belong to any specific economic domain that Smith would recognize.

name	value	max_value	rationale
vsm_relevance	4.0	5.0	This entity has strong VSM relevance as it directly addresses operational mechanisms, which could map across multiple VSM systems (S1 operations, S2 coordination, S3 regulation). The focus on "how things work" aligns well with VSM's systemic perspective.

name	value	max_value	rationale
explanatory_value	2.0	5.0	The entity adds little explanatory value because it's too generic—it names the idea of mechanisms without illuminating any specific mechanism or providing analytical insight. It functions more as a meta-category than an explanatory concept.

Evaluation: Economic System Mechanism

definition_precision — 2.0 / 5.0

The definition is overly broad and circular, essentially defining "mechanism" as "processes and methods through which things function." It lacks the precision needed to distinguish this concept from general economic processes or systems themselves.

source_grounding — 2.0 / 5.0

While Smith does discuss different economic systems and their operations, this entity appears to be a modern analytical abstraction rather than a concept Smith explicitly articulates. The reference to "Book IV, Chapter 0" is also problematic as chapters typically don't start at zero.

domain_placement — 3.0 / 5.0

"General Theory" is appropriate given the broad, meta-analytical nature of this concept. However, the entity is so abstract that it doesn't clearly belong to any specific economic domain that Smith would recognize.

vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity has strong VSM relevance as it directly addresses operational mechanisms, which could map across multiple VSM systems (S1 operations, S2 coordination, S3 regulation). The focus on "how things work" aligns well with VSM's systemic perspective.

explanatory_value — 2.0 / 5.0

The entity adds little explanatory value because it's too generic—it names the idea of mechanisms without illuminating any specific mechanism or providing analytical insight. It functions more as a meta-category than an explanatory concept.

3.2 KiB Raw Blame History