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

4.2 KiB

Raw Blame History

entity_slug, evaluator, evaluated_at, overall_score, scores

entity_slug

evaluator

evaluated_at

overall_score

scores

agricultural_security_gradient

null

2026-02-23T00:31:13.255564

4.6

name	value	max_value	rationale
definition_precision	4.0	5.0	The definition clearly establishes a spectrum concept with specific endpoints (villeinage vs. English freehold) and identifies the causal mechanism linking legal protection to agricultural improvement. The concept is distinct and measurable, though it could be slightly more precise about what constitutes "varying degrees" in the middle of the spectrum.

name	value	max_value	rationale
source_grounding	5.0	5.0	This entity is directly grounded in Smith's analysis in Book III, Chapter 2, where he explicitly discusses how different tenure systems and their associated legal protections created different incentives for agricultural improvement. The comparison between English freehold security and other less secure forms of tenure is a central theme in Smith's historical analysis.

name	value	max_value	rationale
domain_placement	5.0	5.0	The "Regulation" domain is perfectly appropriate since this entity fundamentally concerns legal frameworks governing property rights and tenure arrangements. The concept sits at the intersection of legal institutions and economic incentives, making regulation the natural categorical home.

name	value	max_value	rationale
vsm_relevance	4.0	5.0	This entity maps well to S3 (internal regulation) as it represents the regulatory framework that governs agricultural operations, and also connects to S4 (intelligence/adaptation) since different security levels enable or constrain adaptive improvements. The gradient concept captures how regulatory systems can be more or less conducive to operational effectiveness.

name	value	max_value	rationale
explanatory_value	5.0	5.0	This entity provides significant explanatory power by identifying the causal mechanism between institutional arrangements and economic outcomes. It illuminates why some agricultural systems developed more rapidly than others, moving beyond surface description to reveal the underlying structural relationship between legal security and investment incentives.

Evaluation: Agricultural Security Gradient

definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0

The definition clearly establishes a spectrum concept with specific endpoints (villeinage vs. English freehold) and identifies the causal mechanism linking legal protection to agricultural improvement. The concept is distinct and measurable, though it could be slightly more precise about what constitutes "varying degrees" in the middle of the spectrum.

source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0

This entity is directly grounded in Smith's analysis in Book III, Chapter 2, where he explicitly discusses how different tenure systems and their associated legal protections created different incentives for agricultural improvement. The comparison between English freehold security and other less secure forms of tenure is a central theme in Smith's historical analysis.

domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0

The "Regulation" domain is perfectly appropriate since this entity fundamentally concerns legal frameworks governing property rights and tenure arrangements. The concept sits at the intersection of legal institutions and economic incentives, making regulation the natural categorical home.

vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity maps well to S3 (internal regulation) as it represents the regulatory framework that governs agricultural operations, and also connects to S4 (intelligence/adaptation) since different security levels enable or constrain adaptive improvements. The gradient concept captures how regulatory systems can be more or less conducive to operational effectiveness.

explanatory_value — 5.0 / 5.0

This entity provides significant explanatory power by identifying the causal mechanism between institutional arrangements and economic outcomes. It illuminates why some agricultural systems developed more rapidly than others, moving beyond surface description to reveal the underlying structural relationship between legal security and investment incentives.

4.2 KiB Raw Blame History