Files
oO/ml/experiments/bench/__init__.py
alvis 556019b060 feat(bench): MLflow-based tip-generation benchmark harness (#93, #95)
Combines model evaluation (#93) and prompt A/B testing (#95) into one
experiment. Evaluates all (model × prompt × scenario) cells on the same
fixed contexts so quality differences are attributable.

Architecture:
- Phase A (collect.py): generates candidates per cell, logs to MLflow
  with judge_pending=true. Rejects models >4B, uses keep_alive=0 for
  RAM safety (no concurrent model weights in VRAM).
- Phase B (judge_cli.py): exports pending runs as JSON for Claude Code
  to score per the rubric, then applies scores back to MLflow.
- Phase C (compare.py): leaderboard by (model, prompt) cell.

Rubric (tip-v1) defines 1–5 scales for relevance, actionability, tone,
plus format_ok and overlong flags. Composite = rel + act + tone +
2×format_ok − overlong. Rubric is self-describing and persisted in every
run so judges use consistent criteria across sessions.

Artifacts (prompts, candidates, raw responses) stored as MLflow tags
because the server uses a file:// backend not accessible via REST. Full
artifacts accessible in MLflow UI → run → Tags section.

Tested end-to-end on local machine:
- 4 models (qwen2.5:0.5b/1.5b, gemma3:1b, llama3.2:3b) ≤4B
- 3 prompts (v1, v2-mentor, v3-few-shot)
- 4 scenarios (4 personas × 2 time-slots)
- 48 cells total, all judged and ranked

Winner: qwen2.5:1.5b × v3-few-shot (composite=12.75).

Ready for integration into Airflow prompt_ab_eval DAG and admin UI.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-27 11:48:59 +00:00

19 lines
765 B
Python
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
"""oO tip-generation benchmark harness.
Combines model evaluation (#93) and prompt A/B testing (#95) into one
MLflow-tracked experiment. Each evaluation cell is one (model × prompt ×
scenario) triple; we vary models and prompts on the same fixed scenario
set so quality differences are attributable rather than confounded.
The pipeline follows the lazy-judge pattern: collect candidates with
deterministic metrics (latency, format_ok), export to a JSON file for
Claude Code to score per the rubric, apply scores back to MLflow, and
generate a leaderboard.
RAM safety is enforced: models >4B are rejected, Ollama calls use
keep_alive=0 to unload VRAM immediately, and the human judge (Claude Code
session) has zero inference cost.
See README.md for usage.
"""