From 4630d235b7c505843c17e244cd5fd3ee2401f719 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: LoopX Agent <337587101+loopx-agent@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 13:30:16 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] docs(blog): add empirical Context/Stride ablation and Astra 18h breakthrough evidence Signed-off-by: LoopX Agent <337587101+loopx-agent@users.noreply.github.com> --- .../public/blog/context-delivery/index.html | 68 +- .../edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html | 17 +- .../context-delivery-ablation-en.svg | 614 ++++++++++ .../context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg | 614 ++++++++++ .../context-native-path-v10-en.svg | 152 --- .../context-native-path-v10.svg | 152 --- .../astra-late-breakthrough-en.svg | 1003 +++++++++++++++++ .../astra-late-breakthrough-zh.svg | 1003 +++++++++++++++++ apps/presentation/site/public/blog/index.html | 8 +- .../index.html | 2 + .../blog/zh/context-delivery/index.html | 68 +- .../edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html | 17 +- .../site/public/blog/zh/index.html | 8 +- .../index.html | 2 + 14 files changed, 3402 insertions(+), 326 deletions(-) create mode 100644 apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg create mode 100644 apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg delete mode 100644 apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10-en.svg delete mode 100644 apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10.svg create mode 100644 apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-en.svg create mode 100644 apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-zh.svg diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/context-delivery/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/context-delivery/index.html index 4877c9662d..f7acaef6df 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/context-delivery/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/context-delivery/index.html @@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ -
← All articles

Context delivery

An Agent needs a way to look things up, too

Follow one voice task through progressive reads, JSON Pointers, exact sharing, compaction-cycle deltas, and complete recovery.

-

Long-running work accumulates material: the original goal, later constraints, attempted routes, failed experiments and current progress. Sending everything again on each continuation repeats more and more content; keeping only a summary can make the original basis of a decision difficult to recover.

+
← All articles

Context delivery

An Agent needs a way to look things up, too

Follow one voice task through progressive reads, JSON Pointers, exact sharing, compaction-cycle deltas, and complete recovery.

+

Long-running work accumulates material: the original goal, later constraints, attempted routes, failed experiments and current progress. Sending everything again on each continuation repeats more and more content; keeping only a summary can make the original basis of a decision difficult to recover.

LoopX's context delivery separates these jobs: preserve complete sources, read the facts needed for the current decision, expand supporting material around questions, and reuse unchanged structures exactly within a valid compaction cycle.

This article describes the native Codex path in released LoopX 2.2.0. Supported POSIX Codex App/SSH sessions and new benchmark heartbeat trials default to context delivery; saved off remains effective and explicit off is available. When enabled, complete content is saved first and the Agent receives a reading entrypoint for current facts. See the 2.2.0 release notes for publication and validation scope. The synthetic measurements below retain their original source and experimental conditions.

Think of a capture as a complete book. An index locates its chapters; a JSON Pointer addresses a place inside it. Progressive reading determines how deeply to open the material now. Differential delivery determines what can be reused on the next continuation.

@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@

On the next continuation, deliver what changed

When enabled, the default output is a reading entrypoint

Connect these operations back to the currently supported native Codex quota path:

-

One capture, from saved source to reading

Default Mechanism Path with Context Delivery Enabled: projection.json, required-context.json, compact reference envelope, and progressive readback
decision-<id>/
+

One capture, from saved source to reading

decision-<id>/
 ├─ projection.json        source
 ├─ required-context.json  facts
 ├─ delivery.json          full/delta
@@ -205,7 +205,67 @@ 

Recover missing context while preserving the original work

What the measurements establish

The example separates three mechanisms: avoid repeatedly moving history not currently needed, combine reads that belong together, and avoid retransmitting unchanged verified structures. Complete sources, requirements and recovery connect them.

Reader figures include actual CLI page metadata; local path length affects a small amount of framing. Projection figures compare capture bodies; the cycle table compares codec output. The reproduction script checks these distinct measurements and exact reconstruction.

-

Real long-running tasks must also count necessary later reads, recovery, cache hits, model input/output, tool calls, waiting and human attention. Effectiveness depends on constraints understood, decisions made and accepted outcomes. This synthetic example measures the mechanical path; real model benefit still needs comparable-task evidence.

+

Real long-running tasks must also count necessary later reads, recovery, cache hits, model input/output, tool calls, waiting and human attention. Effectiveness depends on constraints understood, decisions made and accepted outcomes. The synthetic voice example above measures the mechanical path; below we examine multi-task and layered ablation observations on 18-hour trajectories.

+

Multi-task and layered ablation: benefit chain and boundary counterexamples

+

In EdgeBench ANN vector search optimization (gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, 18h, subject to Recall@10 ≥ 0.95) and cross-task ablations, we separate Context Delivery (progressive selection and cycle deltas) from Stride (evidence-conditioned experiment sizing), auditing selected control-packet bytes, main-session model input tokens, and local/early-window counterexamples side by side (reconciled from archived trajectories and receipts by @shangzh0):

+

Multi-task ablation and layered accounting

Progressive Context Delivery and Stride Ablation: ANN 18h Peak QPS Progression and Layered Token/Byte Savings vs Boundary Counterexamples
Top (A): ANN 18h six-arm peak valid throughput QPS (Recall@10 ≥ 0.95). Bottom (B): Layered control-packet byte and main-session input token savings vs Context off (left, negative) alongside disclosed local/early-window overhead and cross-task counterexamples (right, positive). Open image for full size.
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Dimension or experimental armObserved figureScope and interpretation
ANN 18h: Official / Single / Native-Goal5,753 / 5,706 / 4,372 QPSOfficial peaked at 1.05h and remained on a plateau afterward
ANN 18h: Explore · Context off5,766 QPS (+0.2%)Peaked at 11.37h; repeated full-context delivery consumed main-session budget
ANN 18h: Explore · Context on6,020 QPS (+4.6%)Peaked at 14.43h; progressive reads and cycle deltas preserved late-stage headroom
ANN 18h: Explore · Context on + Stride7,159 QPS (+24.4%)Breakthrough at 9.19h (QT_8bit_direct HNSW-SQ8, Recall@10 = 0.9585)
Control-packet bytes: 24 delta events / 46 paired events−74.25% / −38.54%Paired selected bytes dropped from 3,089,841 B to 1,898,889 B (−25.75% across 34 Stride-arm events)
Main-session input tokens: full-18h uncached / total−12.07% / −7.46%Uncached input 8.57M → 7.53M (−7.91% on the 16h common window); total input 272.03M → 251.74M
Counterexample 1: project+read process stdout+57% to +83% (1.57×–1.83×)CLI JSON framing and pagination metadata make process stdout larger than raw selected file bytes
Counterexample 2: First-2h early-window uncached input+304.7% (0.25M → 1.00M)Initial baseline establishment and staged discovery add upfront overhead that only amortizes over longer horizons
Counterexample 3: Historical Grid (lower is better)Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242Cross-task counterexample under differing durations and resources; retained without causal overclaim
+

This dual-track audit shows why control-packet byte reduction (−74.25% / −38.54%) must not be equated with whole-episode model token savings (−12.07% uncached, −7.46% total), nor used to hide early-window indexing overhead (4.05× in the first 2 hours) or cross-task counterexamples. Context Delivery’s practical value lies in slowing context bloat across 10–18 hour runs so that, together with Stride, preserved attention converts into effective late-stage experiments (see EdgeBench late-stage breakthroughs and five-arm attribution).

2.2.0 ships complete sources, file entrypoints, batch selection, index depth, applicable acceptance layering, exact sharing, cycle deltas and recovery. Broader decision-stage candidate, preference and Explore delivery and consistency across all entrypoints remain unfinished. Disable in Settings → This machine → Capabilities → Differential context → Codex; saved off survives upgrade. A command or new benchmark trial can use --context-delivery off. Trials do not inherit the machine switch, and existing frozen trials are not rewritten. Under the default policy, ordinary CLI, unsupported hosts and non-heartbeat benchmarks retain their full paths; an explicit unsupported on request is rejected. Unavailable hooks use full delivery. Saving configuration, actual installation and model adoption remain separate checks.

Read the same material yourself

example.py generates this complete synthetic voice task and invokes the existing reader, progressive projection and delta owners. It checks selected values, directory addresses, all ten requirements, shared references and complete recovery. It registers no Goal, admits or settles no Turn, and calls no model or speech service.

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html index 7e667dbbbd..7b286687fd 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html @@ -16,12 +16,12 @@
-

Ruiteng Huang · October 29, 2026

What does an agent achieve with ten more hours?

How EdgeBench reshaped the LoopX control plane

A research run can start ahead, then barely improve for ten hours. It can keep changing code and lose its best result. These failures made us revisit goals, feedback, experiment size and recovery.

The work began with trace diagnosis in early October: repair evaluation and continuation, follow evidence into the next experiment, then charge the control plane for its own cost. This account follows that progression, including results that challenged the approach.

This article asks how mechanisms changed real research and where they did not help. For what actually reaches the next decision, begin with progressive and differential context delivery, then return to the outcomes and complete costs below.

+

Ruiteng Huang · October 29, 2026 · Updated November 3

What does an agent achieve with ten more hours?

How EdgeBench reshaped the LoopX control plane

A research run can start ahead, then barely improve for ten hours. It can keep changing code and lose its best result. These failures made us revisit goals, feedback, experiment size and recovery.

The work began with trace diagnosis in early October: repair evaluation and continuation, follow evidence into the next experiment, then charge the control plane for its own cost. This account follows that progression, including results that challenged the approach.

This article asks how mechanisms changed real research and where they did not help. For what actually reaches the next decision, begin with progressive and differential context delivery, then return to the outcomes and complete costs below.

Here, kernel means LoopX’s shared goal, admission, transaction and recovery rules. LoopX keeps the original goal, acceptance conditions, work ownership and evidence durable across sessions and hosts. Its control plane constrains state transitions and supplies feedback for the model’s next choice. It does not certify that the choice is insightful. A recorded finding, a read receipt and a replan entry are intermediate evidence; the relevant chain ends in actual work and a validated outcome.

The TypeScript refactor article explains ownership and model-assisted semantic repair. Below, we follow how these rules affect actual research work.

  1. GoalAcceptance and scope
  2. EvidenceResults and limitations
  3. DecisionContinue or change course
  4. WorkExecute and validate
  5. RetentionKeep the best valid result

We separate three observations: an initial advantage, an improvement obtained later, and retention of the best validated artifact. A higher final score can come almost entirely from a stronger starting point. A better intermediate candidate can disappear from the terminal workspace. More runtime, Todos or graph nodes establish none of these outcomes.

-

1. The research progression

PeriodFocusChangeImplementation
Early OctoberFeedback and starting conditionsRepair blind-run prompts, ledger and recovery defects; establish original-task, scoring and continuation boundaries.#5586, #5844, #5879
October 9–11Original goals and useful feedbackPreserve full evaluation responses, candidate identity and original requirements; implementation or submission is not Goal acceptance.#6031, #6039, #6133, #6199
October 12–16Experiment size and recovery pointsReplace mechanical shrinking with grow / switch / verify; jointly preserve conversation, candidates, evaluation opportunities and budget; switch context before replanning.#6298, #6321, #6305, #6622, #6649
Mid-to-late OctoberLater progress and best retentionSeparate starting advantage, subsequent gain and retained best in common windows; Schema exposes high cost and stalled progress.#6440, #6532, #6671
October 22–28Complete control-plane costReduce passive polling and repeated reads; inspect original-Turn closeout, full context, invalid-baseline fallback and recovery cost.#6983, #7013, #7036, #7197, #7269

Cases are selected for mechanism changes and intelligible failures. PRs anchor phases rather than form an exhaustive daily release log. Dates describe research phases; linked records retain creation, merge and historical qualification details.

2. First make the feedback trustworthy

+

1. The research progression

PeriodFocusChangeImplementation
Early OctoberFeedback and starting conditionsRepair blind-run prompts, ledger and recovery defects; establish original-task, scoring and continuation boundaries.#5586, #5844, #5879
October 9–11Original goals and useful feedbackPreserve full evaluation responses, candidate identity and original requirements; implementation or submission is not Goal acceptance.#6031, #6039, #6133, #6199
October 12–16Experiment size and recovery pointsReplace mechanical shrinking with grow / switch / verify; jointly preserve conversation, candidates, evaluation opportunities and budget; switch context before replanning.#6298, #6321, #6305, #6622, #6649
Mid-to-late OctoberLater progress and best retentionSeparate starting advantage, subsequent gain and retained best in common windows; Schema exposes high cost and stalled progress.#6440, #6532, #6671
October 22–28Complete control-plane costReduce passive polling and repeated reads; inspect original-Turn closeout, full context, invalid-baseline fallback and recovery cost.#6983, #7013, #7036, #7197, #7269
Late October–early NovemberLate-stage plateau breakthrough and five-arm attributionBreak the four-arm 91.94 plateau on Astra max 18h (+9 repaired declarations, 0 regressions); separate progressive deltas, Stride sizing and micro-tuning waste across ANN 18h and five-arm studies.#7311, #7759, #7800, #7959, #7960

Cases are selected for mechanism changes and intelligible failures. PRs anchor phases rather than form an exhaustive daily release log. Dates describe research phases; linked records retain creation, merge and historical qualification details.

2. First make the feedback trustworthy

The first Portfolio experiments exposed measurement and execution defects before they could tell us much about strategy. A blind wrapper had removed iterative optimization guidance along with the judge entrypoint. A ledger check attributed earlier market returns to holdings bought only at the closing price. Both confounded the intended comparison; repairing them required new attempts while preserving the old results.

One small oracle made the accounting error clear. Start with 100,000 cash, buy 100 units at a closing price of 200, and pay 10 commission. Immediate equity is 99,990 and NAV is 0.9999; the new holding did not earn the preceding rise from 100. Independent reconciliation then matched all 243 days in each of two frozen samples, with equity residual below 4×10⁻⁹ and no share-count difference. This established ledger consistency, not investment skill. The versioned repair is documented in EdgeBench #14.

Continuation had a related failure: an outer process could wake repeatedly after a work item ended without recovering a useful next action. The governing question must return to the original goal. Completing a Todo can justify another experiment, waiting, or completion; it cannot by itself settle goal acceptance. Correct recovery and feedback make subsequent research interpretable.

@@ -47,9 +47,14 @@

When should a long, unfinished task review its direction +
Historical cohortObserved resultInterpretation
Sol/xhigh, old/new LoopX, Ad Placement · 14h49,589,589,573 → 49,615,495,839Newer run trailed at 2h and led at 14h; its terminal workspace matched its retained best
Astra/xhigh, Official Grid · 6h → 12h1862 → 1810, lower is betterA stronger foundation baseline still produced useful late improvements
Astra max, five-arm study, New Foundations Consistency · 18h91.9412 → 92.3419 (2065 → 2074/2246)Four arms plateaued at ≤91.9412; Explore climbed step-wise across 9.65h–17.57h (+9 repaired declarations, 0 regressions)

Ad Placement provides a concrete instance of later progress rather than a universal plateau. A worse subsequent candidate was rejected and the best version survived. Its raw-score lead is modest—about 0.052%—and only that arm has the cited terminal-workspace verification. The old/new packages changed core and runner together, so this is not an isolated LoopX-feature effect.

The Astra result expands the foundation-model frontier in our observations. Official separated speed changes from search changes and obtained successive native improvements. That progress belongs to the foundation/Official path; it cannot be credited to LoopX. Stronger models also raise the standard for a useful harness: context and review costs must earn their place against an improving baseline.

+

New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18h): breaking a four-arm late-stage plateau

+

In New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18-hour five-arm archive by @shangzh0), the trajectories diverge sharply after hour 6: the official baseline reached 91.9412 (2065/2246) at 5.72h and produced zero gain across 11 subsequent submissions over the next 11.5 hours; heartbeat-resume also plateaued at 91.9412, while native-goal and single stopped at 91.8077 (2062) and 91.6296 (2058).

+
New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18h) five-arm trajectories with 6h–18h zoomed inset: breaking the 91.94 plateau to 92.3419
New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18h) best-so-far trajectories across five arms, with an embedded 6h–18h (91.5–92.5 score) zoomed inset. heartbeat-explore made four step-wise jumps between 9.65h and 17.57h to reach 92.3419 (2074/2246, +9 repaired declarations vs Official with 0 regressions). Open image for full size.
+

As shown in the main trajectory and the lower-right zoomed inset, only heartbeat-explore—combining the evidence ledger with periodic direction reviews—broke out of the plateau after 9.65h (91.99 → 92.03 → 92.07 → 92.25) and jumped at 17.57h to 92.3419 (2074/2246), yielding a net gain of +9 repaired declarations with zero regressions over Official. This is single-run descriptive five-arm evidence showing that when late-stage reviews drive targeted verification of remaining declarations, hours 6–18 can still deliver verifiable gains; it does not guarantee breakthroughs on every task—which is why the Schema counterexample immediately follows.

Schema: an initial lead is not sustained improvement

Schema is the detailed counterexample. In the Sol old/new 14-hour window, the newer run scored 0.804620 versus 0.723684. It already led at the first native result, 0.794620 versus 0.713158, received at different elapsed times. Subsequent increments were only 0.010000 and 0.010526. The larger endpoint advantage mostly reflected the initial result; continuing code changes did not close the six original target requirements.

A separate Astra/xhigh 12-hour comparison was less favorable: Official reached 0.881813 and LoopX 0.786257, with neither improving its best between 6h and 12h. LoopX recorded 36 completed compactions versus four, and about 5.32 times the uncached input. Compaction can overlap useful work, and versions, recovery, shared load and scorer conditions differ. The trace still identifies the practical challenge: producing more changes and more control activity did not produce more accepted value.

@@ -111,6 +116,12 @@

Measure structural input separately

The context study recorded on October 28 starts Grid, Schema and Ad Placement from their original tasks with Sol/max and an 18-hour upper limit per case. Historical Official or older LoopX runs provide descriptive references where usable. Their model/effort, source, scorer, opportunity and clock differences remain visible; they are not strict matched controls. A new baseline is warranted where the old material cannot answer the relevant question. Attempts with different source versions, continuity bases or transports are analyzed separately, rather than pooled as one treatment.

First verify that actual delivery changes: the initial full read, a subsequent delta with its continuity basis stated, complete fallback after known baseline loss, and a full review-to-work interaction. Then compare useful progress, retained artifacts and the complete usage vector. Requested flags, receipts and smaller local packets cannot substitute for that evidence. If the feature fails its intended behavior, stop the affected attempt, preserve its costs and history, repair it and use a new attempt identity.

The first Grid and Ad interactions on the new native Hook path have completed full paging, one delta and subsequent task work. Within each same capture, the delta payload was 19.53% and 19.48% smaller than its corresponding full packet. These are single-read payload comparisons: they exclude page envelopes, subsequent model input, hooks, recovery and review costs. They do not establish lower total cost. A complete review-to-native-outcome cycle, sustained benefit and failure recovery remain to be verified.

Our effectiveness target is useful progress after many hours and reliable retention of it. Our efficiency target is comparable accepted value with less complete cost and human attention. The next result must address both. Current runs retain the original deadline, and failed or replaced attempts retain their costs and history.

-

This remains the October 28 research checkpoint. The 2.2.0 release and default-on policy do not automatically pass its unresolved checks. The mechanism article’s synthetic byte measurements, release-path installation/recovery checks, and this section’s real model trajectories answer questions about mechanical delivery, product usability and research effectiveness respectively. Their versions, windows and metrics differ; they are not a combined savings result.

Numerical evidence retains each stated historical model, version, window and validity boundary. Public implementation: LoopX. Earlier detailed research records remain in the previous article revision. Raw trajectories, hidden evaluator material, runtime credentials and private operating context are not published here.

+

This remains the October 28 research checkpoint. The 2.2.0 release and default-on policy do not automatically pass its unresolved checks. The mechanism article’s synthetic byte measurements, release-path installation/recovery checks, and this section’s real model trajectories answer questions about mechanical delivery, product usability and research effectiveness respectively. Their versions, windows and metrics differ; they are not a combined savings result.

+

Early-November update: ANN 18h layered ablation and cross-task five-arm causal attribution

+

Subsequent early-November studies added two pieces of empirical evidence:

+
    +
  • Context Delivery × Stride multi-task and layered ablation (ANN 18h, gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, Recall@10 ≥ 0.95): Across 18-hour vector-search runs, Explore · Context on + Stride reached 7,159 QPS (+24.4% over Official at 5,753 QPS, and ahead of Explore · Context on at 6,020 QPS and Context off at 5,766 QPS). Paired control-packet selected bytes fell 38.54% (3.09 MB → 1.90 MB, with 24 delta events reduced by 74.25%), while full-18h main-session uncached input tokens fell 12.07% (8.57M → 7.53M) and total input tokens fell 7.46% (272.03M → 251.74M). Alongside these gains, we retain three explicit boundary counterexamples: project+read process stdout was 1.57×–1.83× raw selected file bytes, first-2h early-window uncached input tokens rose 4.05× (0.25M → 1.00M) during initial baseline establishment, and the cross-task Historical Grid counterexample ordered Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242. Full charts and dual-track accounting appear in the context-delivery ablation section.
  • +
  • Cross-task five-arm causal attribution (Portfolio, Grid, Graph, Ad Placement): In the reproducible five-arm attribution report (#7960) and cross-task inflection & replan overhead study (#7959), tracing 86 replan events showed that blind runs without evaluator feedback collapsed to 0.00 on Portfolio whereas native feedback acted as a monotonic ratchet (Official Native retained 53.87, Explore 31.19, Stride 35.82); on Graph 18h, the true classification breakthrough occurred at 2.1h (0.7194) while 7 post-peak attempts after 9.6h (0.7240) spent 159.87M input tokens (46.0% of budget) against the linear-model theoretical ceiling (0.73903); and replacing fixed 3-Todo reviews with effective-Turn Stride (evidence_conditioned_v1) raised valid-jump conversion from 11.4% (Explore-Off) and 30.6% (Explore-On) to 62.5% while reducing control-plane protocol tax from 23.9% to 12.4%–14.1%.
  • +

Numerical evidence retains each stated historical model, version, window and validity boundary. Public implementation: LoopX. Earlier detailed research records remain in the previous article revision. Raw trajectories, hidden evaluator material, runtime credentials and private operating context are not published here.

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..1330ab1e1c --- /dev/null +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg @@ -0,0 +1,614 @@ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2000 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4000 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6000 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 8000 + + + + Peak Valid Throughput QPS (Recall@10 ≥ 0.95, Higher Is Better) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Native-Goal (peaked at 1.73h) + + + + + + + + + + Single (peaked at 4.08h) + + + + + + + + + + Official (peaked at 1.05h) + + + + + + + + + + Explore · Context off (11.37h) + + + + + + + + + + Explore · Context on (14.43h) + + + + + + + + + + Explore · Context on + Stride (9.19h jump) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Official baseline: 5,753 QPS + + + 4,372 QPS + + + 5,706 QPS + + + 5,753 QPS + + + 5,766 QPS (+0.2%) + + + 6,020 QPS (+4.6% vs Official) + + + 7,159 QPS (+24.4% vs Official) + + + A. ANN Vector Search (gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, 18h): Context Delivery + Stride Yields +24.4% Peak QPS + + + + + + + + + + QT_8bit_direct (HNSW-SQ8) · Recall@10 = 0.9585 ≥ 0.95 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -150 + + + + + + + + + + + + + -100 + + + + + + + + + + + + + -50 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 50 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 100 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 150 + + + + Change vs Context off (%) — Negative Left = Net Savings; Positive Right = Disclosed Local/Early-Window Overhead + + + + + + + + + + + Delta event control-packet bytes (24 delta events) + + + + + + + + + + Paired control-packet selected bytes (46 events: 3.09MB → 1.90MB) + + + + + + + + + + Stride arm control-packet selected bytes (34 events) + + + + + + + + + + Main-session uncached input tokens (full 18h: 8.57M → 7.53M) + + + + + + + + + + Main-session uncached input tokens (16h common window) + + + + + + + + + + Main-session total input tokens (full 18h: 272.03M → 251.74M) + + + + + + + + + + Boundary 1: project+read process stdout vs selected file bytes + + + + + + + + + + Boundary 2: First-2h early-window uncached input (0.25M → 1.00M) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -74.25% (delta-event byte reduction) + + + -38.54% (3,089,841 B → 1,898,889 B) + + + -25.75% (Stride arm, 34 events) + + + -12.07% (8.57M → 7.53M tokens) + + + -7.91% (16h common window) + + + -7.46% (272.03M → 251.74M, responses -6.46%) + + + +57% to +83% (stdout is 1.57x–1.83x selected bytes) + + + +304.7% (4.05x first-2h early-window counterexample) + + + B. Layered Accounting Audit: Control-Packet Bytes, Main-Session Input Tokens & Boundary Counterexamples + + + + + + + Progressive Context Delivery & Stride Ablation: Benefit Chain and Boundary Counterexamples + + + Cross-task counterexample (Historical Grid, lower is better): Official 1967 < Explore Context off 2054 < Explore Context on+Stride 2088 < Explore Context on 2242 < Goal 2430 (different durations/resources; retained without causal overclaim). + + + + + + + + + + + diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..1f71edd608 --- /dev/null +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg @@ -0,0 +1,614 @@ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2000 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4000 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6000 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 8000 + + + + 最高有效吞吐 QPS (Recall@10 ≥ 0.95,越高越好) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Native-Goal (1.73h 触顶) + + + + + + + + + + Single (4.08h 触顶) + + + + + + + + + + Official (1.05h 触顶) + + + + + + + + + + Explore · Context off (11.37h) + + + + + + + + + + Explore · Context on (14.43h) + + + + + + + + + + Explore · Context on + Stride (9.19h 突破) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Official 基准:5,753 QPS + + + 4,372 QPS + + + 5,706 QPS + + + 5,753 QPS + + + 5,766 QPS (+0.2%) + + + 6,020 QPS (+4.6% vs Official) + + + 7,159 QPS (+24.4% vs Official) + + + A. ANN 向量检索 (gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, 18h):Context 渐进交付 + Stride 步幅控制带来 +24.4% 吞吐跃升 + + + + + + + + + + QT_8bit_direct (HNSW-SQ8) · Recall@10 = 0.9585 ≥ 0.95 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -150 + + + + + + + + + + + + + -100 + + + + + + + + + + + + + -50 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 50 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 100 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 150 + + + + 相对 Context off 的变化比例 (%) —— 左侧负值为净节省,右侧正值为诚实披露的局部/早窗开销 + + + + + + + + + + + Delta 事件控制包字节 (24 个增量事件) + + + + + + + + + + 配对控制包总选中字节 (46 事件:3.09MB → 1.90MB) + + + + + + + + + + Stride 臂控制包选中字节 (34 个事件对比) + + + + + + + + + + 主会话未缓存输入 Token (全 18h:8.57M → 7.53M) + + + + + + + + + + 主会话未缓存输入 Token (16h 公共窗口同口径) + + + + + + + + + + 主会话总输入 Token (全 18h:272.03M → 251.74M) + + + + + + + + + + 边界反例 1:project+read 进程 stdout / 选中文件字节 + + + + + + + + + + 边界反例 2:前 2h 早窗未缓存输入 Token (0.25M → 1.00M) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -74.25%(增量事件裁剪率) + + + -38.54%(3,089,841 B → 1,898,889 B) + + + -25.75%(Stride 臂 34 事件) + + + -12.07%(8.57M → 7.53M tokens) + + + -7.91%(16h 公共窗口) + + + -7.46%(272.03M → 251.74M,响应数 -6.46%) + + + +57% ~ +83%(stdout 为选中字节的 1.57x–1.83x) + + + +304.7%(4.05x,前 2h 早窗反例) + + + B. 分层计量审计:控制包选中字节、主会话输入 Token 净节省与局部边界反例 + + + + + + + Context 渐进式交付与 Stride 步幅控制消融:收益链路与边界反例双轨审计 + + + 跨题诚实对照 (Historical Grid,越低越好):Official 1967 < Explore Context off 2054 < Explore Context on+Stride 2088 < Explore Context on 2242 < Goal 2430(不同时长/资源条件,保留反例不作因果外推)。 + + + + + + + + + + + diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10-en.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10-en.svg deleted file mode 100644 index 003d26c265..0000000000 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10-en.svg +++ /dev/null @@ -1,152 +0,0 @@ - - Context Delivery: Standard Path Tree & JSON Pointer Structure - Standard on-disk capture directory decision-<id>/, progressive JSON Pointer hierarchy in required-context.json, and context_capture_navigation_v1 envelope. - - - - - - - - - - - - LOOPX 2.2 · STANDARD DELIVERY PATH & POINTER TREE (V10) - Context Delivery: Standard Path Tree & JSON Pointer Structure - From the on-disk decision-<id>/ directory tree, to the required-context.json pointer hierarchy, to the navigation_v1 model entry - - - A. On-Disk Capture Tree (decision-<id>/) - B. Standard JSON Pointer Tree in required-context.json - C. Navigation envelope & reading - - - - - ~/.loopx/context-delivery/decision-<id>/ - - - - - - - - - - - ├─ projection.json - Full raw source persisted first (57,014 B) - Goal · Todos · Outcomes · Sources - - - - ├─ required-context.json - Keeps requirements & risk states (5,107 B) - + supporting_material_pointer + context_ref - - - - ├─ delivery.json - context_delivery_v1 (5,543B full → 2,164B delta) - mode: "full" | "delta" (captured_file) - - - - └─ *.reader.json - context_capture_read_reference_v1 (full digest) - • required-context.reader.json (recovery) - • delivery.<hash16>.reader.json (nav) - - - - - - - - - / (required-context.json root) - - - ├─ /interaction_contract/agent_channel/work_context/sources/0 - │ └─ /content/goal_acceptance_contract/outcome_requirements - │ └─ /outcomes/0 - - - ├─ objective, status, requirements/2/description - ├─ requirements/2/agent_review: {"conclusion":"unmet","basis_current":false} - ← Inline at decision layer: requirements & unmet/stale flags - - - └─ supporting_material_pointer: "/.../outcomes/0" - ← Deferred pointer back to projection.json: - • <ptr>/sources • <ptr>/requirements/2/agent_review/note - • <ptr>/requirements/2/agent_review/evidence_refs - - - ├─ /agent_todo_summary/first_open_items/0 - ← Canonical full Todo record (1,052 B) - - - ├─ /selected_todo: {"todo_id": "todo_voice", - │ "context_ref": "/agent_todo_summary/first_open_items/0"} - ← Exact same-view pointer share (80 B) - - - - └─ /context_details - ├─ path: ".../decision-<id>/projection.json" - ├─ sha256: "<64-hex>" - ← Raw capture entry (path + sha256 + command_template) - - - - - - - - - - { "schema_version": "context_capture_navigation_v1", - "mode": "full" | "delta", - "reference_file": ".../delivery.<h16>.reader.json", - "first_read_command": "loopx ... --initial-read", - "recovery": { - "reference_file": ".../required-context.reader.json", - "command": "loopx --format json quota context-read ..." - }, - "baseline_reference": { ... } // when mode="delta" } - - - - ① Initial orientation read (--initial-read) - quota context-read --reference-file "$REF" --initial-read - - - ② Batch-select known pointers (3 facts, 1,362 B) - quota context-read --reference-file "$REC" \ --select /goal/objective --select /goal/constraints - - - ③ Discover unknown subtree (2-level TOC, 1,283 B) - quota context-read --reference-file "$REC" \ --select /providers --list --list-depth 2 - - - ④ Follow supporting_material_pointer to raw evidence - quota context-read --capture-file projection.json \ --select "$PTR/requirements/2/agent_review/note" - - Path Invariant: even when delivery.json is mode: "delta", recovery.reference_file points to current required-context.json for direct --select; context_details links to raw projection.json. - diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10.svg deleted file mode 100644 index 68b73fe717..0000000000 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-native-path-v10.svg +++ /dev/null @@ -1,152 +0,0 @@ - - Context Delivery 标准交付路径与 JSON Pointer 结构 - 展示 ~/.loopx/context-delivery/decision-<id>/ 标准目录树、required-context.json 内部 JSON Pointer 分层结构、以及 context_capture_navigation_v1 默认交付包络。 - - - - - - - - - - - - LOOPX 2.2 · CONTEXT DELIVERY 标准路径与指针结构 (V10) - Context Delivery 标准交付路径与 JSON Pointer 结构 - 从磁盘 decision-<id>/ 四件套,到 required-context.json 内部指针树,再到模型收到的 navigation_v1 入口 - - - A. 标准落盘目录树 (decision-<id>/) - B. required-context.json 标准内部路径结构 - C. 模型交付包络与选读入口 - - - - - ~/.loopx/context-delivery/decision-<id>/ - - - - - - - - - - - ├─ projection.json - 完整当前来源先落盘 (57,014 B) - Goal · Todos · Outcomes · Sources - - - - ├─ required-context.json - 保留 10 条要求与风险状态 (5,107 B) - + supporting_material_pointer + context_ref - - - - ├─ delivery.json - context_delivery_v1 (5,543B full → 2,164B delta) - mode: "full" | "delta" (captured_file) - - - - └─ *.reader.json - context_capture_read_reference_v1 (私有完整摘要) - • required-context.reader.json (recovery) - • delivery.<hash16>.reader.json (nav) - - - - - - - - - / (required-context.json root) - - - ├─ /interaction_contract/agent_channel/work_context/sources/0 - │ └─ /content/goal_acceptance_contract/outcome_requirements - │ └─ /outcomes/0 - - - ├─ objective, status, requirements/2/description - ├─ requirements/2/agent_review: {"conclusion":"unmet","basis_current":false} - ← 决策层常驻:完整要求 + 未通过/过期标记 - - - └─ supporting_material_pointer: "/.../outcomes/0" - ← 延迟展开指针:指向 projection.json 原位置 - • <ptr>/sources • <ptr>/requirements/2/agent_review/note - • <ptr>/requirements/2/agent_review/evidence_refs - - - ├─ /agent_todo_summary/first_open_items/0 - ← 完整 Todo 唯一主位置 (1,052 B) - - - ├─ /selected_todo: {"todo_id": "todo_voice", - │ "context_ref": "/agent_todo_summary/first_open_items/0"} - ← 同视图精确共享引用 (80 B) - - - - └─ /context_details - ├─ path: ".../decision-<id>/projection.json" - ├─ sha256: "<64-hex>" - ← 原文回读入口 (path + sha256 + command_template) - - - - - - - - - - { "schema_version": "context_capture_navigation_v1", - "mode": "full" | "delta", - "reference_file": ".../delivery.<h16>.reader.json", - "first_read_command": "loopx ... --initial-read", - "recovery": { - "reference_file": ".../required-context.reader.json", - "command": "loopx --format json quota context-read ..." - }, - "baseline_reference": { ... } // when mode="delta" } - - - - ① 起始必读导航 (--initial-read) - quota context-read --reference-file "$REF" --initial-read - - - ② 已知 Pointer 单次批量读取 (3 处 1,362 B) - quota context-read --reference-file "$REC" \ --select /goal/objective --select /goal/constraints - - - ③ 陌生子树先展开两层目录 (1,283 B) - quota context-read --reference-file "$REC" \ --select /providers --list --list-depth 2 - - - ④ 沿 supporting_material_pointer 追回原证据 - quota context-read --capture-file projection.json \ --select "$PTR/requirements/2/agent_review/note" - - 核心路径不变量:即使 delivery.json 为 mode: "delta",recovery.reference_file 仍直指当前 required-context.json,支持直接 --select 任意当前事实;context_details 直通原始 projection.json。 - diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-en.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-en.svg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..0eb1c2824c --- /dev/null +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-en.svg @@ -0,0 +1,1003 @@ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 12 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 18 + + + + Elapsed Execution Hours (Submission Clock Hours) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 20 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 40 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 60 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 80 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 100 + + + + Best Valid Native Score So Far (0–100, Higher Is Better) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 12 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 18 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 91.60 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 91.80 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 91.94 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 92.10 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 92.34 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 17.57h jump to 92.3419 (2074/2246) + +9 repaired declarations vs Official (0 regressions) + + + + + + + 9.65h–13.98h: Step-wise climb + (91.99 → 92.03 → 92.07 → 92.25) + + + Official / Resume plateau at 91.9412 (2065/2246) + + + Zoomed Inset (91.5–92.5): Breaking the 6h–18h Plateau + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 5.72h: Official reaches 91.9412 (2065/2246) + Next 11.5 hours: 11 consecutive submissions with zero gain + + + + + + + + + + official (Baseline: 91.9412 / 2065) + + + + + + single (Single session: 91.6296 / 2058) + + + + + + native-goal (Native Goal: 91.8077 / 2062) + + + + + + heartbeat-resume (Resume only: 91.9412 / 2065) + + + + + + heartbeat-explore (Explore + replan: 92.3419 / 2074) + + + + + New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18h): Breaking the 91.94 Late-Stage Plateau + + + Source: EdgeBench New Foundations Consistency 18h five-arm archive (@shangzh0, SHA256: 5f085253…). Step lines connect valid scored submissions only (missing scores not interpolated as 0); single-run descriptive observation. + + + + + + + + + + + diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-zh.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-zh.svg new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..ab4b9e42b4 --- /dev/null +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/astra-late-breakthrough-zh.svg @@ -0,0 +1,1003 @@ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 12 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 18 + + + + 自执行启动以来的运行小时数 (Submission Clock Hours) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 20 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 40 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 60 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 80 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 100 + + + + 当前最高有效原生得分 (Score 0–100,越高越好) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 12 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 15 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 18 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 91.60 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 91.80 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 91.94 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 92.10 + + + + + + + + + + + + + 92.34 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 17.57h 跃升至 92.3419 (2074/2246) + 较 Official 净增 +9 个修复声明(0 丢失) + + + + + + + 9.65h–13.98h:阶梯式逼近 + (91.99 → 92.03 → 92.07 → 92.25) + + + Official / Resume 锁死于 91.9412 (2065/2246) + + + 局部放大 (91.5–92.5 分):6h–18h 突破局部平台期 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 5.72h:Official 触顶 91.9412 (2065/2246) + 此后 11.5 小时连续 11 次提交零增益(平台期锁死) + + + + + + + + + + official(官方基线:91.9412 / 2065) + + + + + + single(单次会话:91.6296 / 2058) + + + + + + native-goal(原生 Goal:91.8077 / 2062) + + + + + + heartbeat-resume(普通续跑:91.9412 / 2065) + + + + + + heartbeat-explore(探索重规划:92.3419 / 2074) + + + + + New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18h):长程探索突破 91.94 平台期轨迹实证 + + + 数据来源:EdgeBench New Foundations Consistency 18h 五臂归档记录 (@shangzh0, SHA256: 5f085253…)。曲线仅连接有效评分提交,缺失评分不插值为 0;单批次描述性观测,不外推跨题普适性。 + + + + + + + + + + + diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/index.html index 94151f8d27..9c366bed44 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/index.html @@ -35,8 +35,8 @@

LoopX · Blog

Engineering the long run.

Design, engineering, and field notes on long-horizon agents.

-

Context delivery · Mechanisms and examples

-

An Agent needs a way to look things up, too

One voice task explains JSON Pointers, batched selection, index depth, complete requirements, exact sharing and compaction-cycle deltas. Synthetic byte measurements remain distinct from real model benefit.

Read article
+

Context delivery · Mechanisms and examples

· Updated November 3

+

An Agent needs a way to look things up, too

One voice task explains JSON Pointers, batched selection, index depth, complete requirements, exact sharing and compaction-cycle deltas, paired with ANN 18h (7,159 vs 5,753 QPS) layered byte/token ablations and early-window/cross-task counterexamples.

Read article
-

Research notes · EdgeBench

· Revised October 29

-

What does an agent achieve with ten more hours?

Follow the research from early to late October: reliable feedback, goals, experiment size and recovery, tested against Schema’s plateau and complete usage.

Read article
+

Research notes · EdgeBench

· Revised November 3

+

What does an agent achieve with ten more hours?

Follow the research from early October to early November: reliable feedback, goals, experiment size and recovery, tested across New Foundations Consistency’s 18h plateau breakthrough, Schema’s plateau counterexample and five-arm causal attribution.

Read article

Design perspective · Self-improvement

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html index 4e84dd3cfe..3a02b31bf8 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html @@ -178,6 +178,7 @@

6. After SQLite: retained history needs a cost model

Third, object ownership during replay affects correctness. #4931 reduced copying, sorting, and encoding of unchanged subtrees, and stopped materializing unused full projections for receipt lookup. It also prevented a caller's mutation of a returned projection from poisoning the next replay basis. Persisted proof bytes remained unchanged.

Some paths improved substantially. Large-state latency, scan cost, and memory still had gaps, and the PR retained the unmet targets. Those distinctions are more useful than a single performance-improvement label for every path.

In October, #5805 changed unconfigured new-Goal defaults to canonical SQLite and hard leases. Existing Goals, explicit choices, and old operation retries retained their own contracts. A new default, migration of existing data, and retirement of old writers happened at different stages.

+

In early November, #7834 extended sqlite_v0 to own archived Todo history (todo_archive): during todo complete and todo supersede transactions, terminal items beyond the bounded active window (N = 5) are atomically archived into SQLite, decoupling the active ACTIVE_GOAL_STATE.md projection size from total historical volume while preserving exact ID readback and receipt recovery.

7. Song's Semantics: connect definition, production, and interpretation

Our new maintainer, Song (@songoow), initiated and implemented the Semantics RFC, registry, and commit-path checks in #4433, merged on September 15. He continued advancing convergence afterward. This track governs how concepts grow as the software changes.

Cross-language migration readily creates duplicate knowledge. The same state can appear in a Python Enum, Literal, TS as const, a presentation layer, and a conditional branch. Even if the strings match today, one location may gain a value or change its interpretation tomorrow.

@@ -236,6 +237,7 @@

9. Recover the original result while protecting current autho

The current path decodes and locates the correct authority, then checks original identity, intent, and receipt. If it is the same committed operation, it recovers the original result. Work without a matching original result proceeds through current admission. The selected provider must still be available and its proof valid; failure cannot quietly redirect writes to Markdown.

Returning the original result does not renew a lease, overwrite later commits, or revive a retired writer. Lease transfers, epoch changes, and subsequent state have their own protections.

Types express the distinction too. Historical decoding still recognizes legacy; current fresh-execution handoff configuration accepts soft_claim and hard_lease. Reading an old record, recovering an original operation, and authorizing current execution each have independent conditions.

+

Atomic CLI self-claim in 2.2.0 (#7510, #7793) follows the same rule: one command atomically claims the task and acquires a hard_lease grant, returning progress and completion commands bound to the active lease_epoch, while replaying an old claim recovers only its original receipt without extending an expired generation.

An internal receipt also has a limited scope. If a remote external effect lacks a verifiable idempotent identity and readback, settling once in the control plane cannot establish that the remote effect executed exactly once. Uncertainty belongs at the boundary where it actually occurs.

10. CLI output budgets: protect decision semantics before compression

CLI language participates in an agent's decisions. This engineering constraint predates the final writer retirement and remained a validation boundary during migration.

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/context-delivery/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/context-delivery/index.html index 4110aeb177..1da678d9e2 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/context-delivery/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/context-delivery/index.html @@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ -
← 全部文章

Context delivery

Agent 读上下文,也需要一套“查书”的方法

从一个语音任务理解渐进式读取、JSON Pointer、精确共享、compaction 周期内的结构化差分,以及失效后的完整恢复。

-

Agent 做长任务,资料会越来越多:原目标、后来追加的约束、试过的方案、失败的实验、当前做到哪里。每次继续都把整份材料再塞一遍,重复会不断累积;只留一段摘要,又可能找不回决定所依赖的原话。

+
← 全部文章

Context delivery

Agent 读上下文,也需要一套“查书”的方法

从一个语音任务理解渐进式读取、JSON Pointer、精确共享、compaction 周期内的结构化差分,以及失效后的完整恢复。

+

Agent 做长任务,资料会越来越多:原目标、后来追加的约束、试过的方案、失败的实验、当前做到哪里。每次继续都把整份材料再塞一遍,重复会不断累积;只留一段摘要,又可能找不回决定所依赖的原话。

LoopX 的 context delivery 把这件事拆开做:完整资料保存下来,当前决定需要的事实先读,支持材料沿问题展开;同一个有效 compaction 周期内,再精确复用没有变化的结构。

本文以已发布的 LoopX 2.2.0 Codex 原生路径为准。受支持的 POSIX Codex App/SSH 会话与新的 benchmark heartbeat 默认开启 context delivery;已有关闭设置继续生效,也可以显式关闭。开启后完整内容先保存,Agent 收到当前读取入口。具体发布与验证范围见 2.2.0 版本说明;下文的合成测量仍保留原始实验版本与条件。

可以把它想成查一本厚书:capture 是完整保存的那本书,目录告诉我们章节在哪,JSON Pointer 是书内地址。渐进式读取决定这一刻翻到多深;差分决定下一轮哪些内容可以沿用。

@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@

下一轮继续,交付这次改变了什么

开启后,默认交付的是一个读取入口

把前面的动作接回产品,当前支持的 Codex 原生 quota 路径是:

-

同一次捕获,从保存到读取

Context Delivery 开启后的默认机制路径:完整原始捕获 projection.json、必要视图 required-context.json、小文件引用与按问题逐层选读
decision-<id>/
+

同一次捕获,从保存到读取

decision-<id>/
 ├─ projection.json        原始捕获
 ├─ required-context.json  必要视图
 ├─ delivery.json          full/delta
@@ -205,7 +205,67 @@ 

压缩或读取失败,恢复上下文,也保留原工作这些数据说明了什么

这组例子把三个收益来源分开了:少重复搬当前用不上的历史,少发本可合并的读取请求,少重复交付已经核验的不变结构。 完整来源、要求与恢复路径贯穿其中。

上面的 reader 数字包含实际 CLI 响应中的分页元数据;本机路径长度会影响少量封装字节。原生投影数字比较捕获正文,周期表比较编码层,三种口径分别列出。示例脚本可复算这些值与完整还原结果。

-

放回真实长程任务,还要把必要补读、恢复、缓存命中、模型输入输出、工具调用、等待与人工介入一起算进去;效果则看是否漏掉约束、做错决定,最后交付了什么。这个合成例子测清了机械路径,真实模型收益仍需可比任务验证。

+

放回真实长程任务,还要把必要补读、恢复、缓存命中、模型输入输出、工具调用、等待与人工介入一起算进去;效果则看是否漏掉约束、做错决定,最后交付了什么。前面的语音合成例子测清了机械路径,下面补入真实 18 小时长程任务上的多题与分层消融观察。

+

真实模型与多题消融实证:收益链路与边界反例

+

在 EdgeBench ANN 向量检索优化(gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh,18h,约束 Recall@10 ≥ 0.95)与跨题消融中,我们将 Context Delivery(渐进读取与周期差分)与 Stride(基于证据差分的步长控制)拆开对照,同时统计控制包选中字节、主会话模型输入 Token 与局部/早窗反例(基于 @shangzh0 归档轨迹与控制面回执复算):

+

多题消融与分层计量审计

Context 渐进式交付与 Stride 步幅控制消融:ANN 18h 峰值吞吐 QPS 对比与分层 Token/字节节省及边界反例
上图(A):ANN 18h 六臂峰值有效吞吐 QPS(Recall@10 ≥ 0.95)。下图(B):相对 Context off 的分层字节与主会话输入 Token 节省(左,负值)及诚实披露的局部/早窗开销与跨题反例(右,正值)。点击查看原图。
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
观测维度或实验臂对照数值口径与解释
ANN 18h:Official / Single / Native-Goal5,753 / 5,706 / 4,372 QPSOfficial 在 1.05h 触顶后进入长平台期
ANN 18h:Explore · Context off5,766 QPS(+0.2%)11.37h 触顶;全量上下文重复投递消耗较多主会话预算
ANN 18h:Explore · Context on6,020 QPS(+4.6%)14.43h 触顶;渐进选读与周期差分释放后程上下文余量
ANN 18h:Explore · Context on + Stride7,159 QPS(+24.4%)9.19h 突破(QT_8bit_direct HNSW-SQ8,Recall@10 = 0.9585)
控制包字节:24 个 Delta 事件 / 46 个配对事件−74.25% / −38.54%配对总选中字节由 3,089,841 B 降至 1,898,889 B(Stride 臂 34 事件为 −25.75%)
主会话输入 Token:全 18h 未缓存 / 总输入−12.07% / −7.46%未缓存输入 8.57M → 7.53M(16h 公共窗口为 −7.91%);总输入 272.03M → 251.74M
边界反例 1:project+read 进程 stdout+57% ~ +83%(1.57×–1.83×)CLI JSON 封装与分页导航使进程 stdout 高于被选中的原始文件字节
边界反例 2:前 2h 早窗未缓存输入 Token+304.7%(0.25M → 1.00M)早窗首次建立基线与分步选读存在前置开销,需在更长周期内摊薄
边界反例 3:跨题 Historical Grid(越低越好)Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242不同时长与资源条件下的历史跨题反例;保留负向观察,不作跨题因果外推
+

这组双轨实证说明:控制包裁剪率(−74.25% / −38.54%)不能直接等同于整轮模型 Token 节省(未缓存 −12.07%、总输入 −7.46%),更不能掩盖前 2 小时早窗的前置建索引开销(4.05×)和跨题反例。 Context Delivery 的真实价值在于长周期(如 10h–18h)内延缓上下文膨胀、配合 Stride 将省下的注意力转化为后程有效实验(参见 EdgeBench 后程突破与五臂归因)。

2.2.0 已交付完整来源、文件入口、批量选择、目录深度、适用验收分层、精确共享、周期差分与恢复。更广的候选、偏好、Explore 按决策阶段统一交付及全入口一致性仍有未完成部分。在「设置 → 本机 → 能力 → 差分上下文 → Codex」可以关闭,已有 off 会保留;单次命令或新 benchmark trial 可用 --context-delivery off。Trial 不继承本机开关,已有冻结 trial 不被重写。默认策略下,普通 CLI、不支持的宿主和非 heartbeat benchmark 保留原完整路径;显式请求不支持的 on 会明确拒绝,hooks 不可用时使用完整交付。保存配置、实际安装与模型采用分别核验。

用同一份材料动手读一遍

example.py 完整生成这个合成语音任务,调用现有 reader、渐进投影与差分 owner,逐项核对选择值、目录地址、全部 10 条要求、共享引用与完整恢复。程序不注册 Goal,不做准入或结算,也不调用模型或语音服务。

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html index 095f7e2722..aee6805483 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html @@ -16,12 +16,12 @@
-

黄睿腾 · 2026 年 10 月 29 日

让 Agent 多做十小时,究竟多做出了什么?

EdgeBench 如何反过来改造 LoopX 的长程控制面

一项研究可以起步更好,却在接下来的十小时里几乎没有增长。也可以不断改代码,最后丢掉最好结果。我们用这两种失败,重新审视目标、反馈、实验步长与恢复。

这条研究从 10 月初的轨迹诊断开始,先修评测与续跑,再追踪证据怎样进入下一次实验,最后把控制面自己的成本算进来。下面按这个过程展开:哪些机制改了,哪些结果支持它,哪些结果迫使我们改方向。

本文回答机制怎样改变真实研究,以及还没有改善什么。若想先看“下一次决定到底读到了什么”,可从上下文的渐进与差分交付开始,再回到下文的成果与完整成本。

+

黄睿腾 · 2026 年 10 月 29 日 · 11 月 3 日更新实证

让 Agent 多做十小时,究竟多做出了什么?

EdgeBench 如何反过来改造 LoopX 的长程控制面

一项研究可以起步更好,却在接下来的十小时里几乎没有增长。也可以不断改代码,最后丢掉最好结果。我们用这两种失败,重新审视目标、反馈、实验步长与恢复。

这条研究从 10 月初的轨迹诊断开始,先修评测与续跑,再追踪证据怎样进入下一次实验,最后把控制面自己的成本算进来。下面按这个过程展开:哪些机制改了,哪些结果支持它,哪些结果迫使我们改方向。

本文回答机制怎样改变真实研究,以及还没有改善什么。若想先看“下一次决定到底读到了什么”,可从上下文的渐进与差分交付开始,再回到下文的成果与完整成本。

这里的 kernel 指 LoopX 共享的目标、准入、事务和恢复规则。LoopX 让原始目标、验收条件、工作归属和证据跨会话、跨宿主持久化。控制面约束状态转换,为模型的下一步提供反馈,但不能认证这个选择是否高明。一条发现、一次读取回执、一条 replan 记录都只是中间证据;真正需要追踪的链条,要落到实际工作和经过验证的成果。

这些规则的归属和强模型参与的语义修复,见 TypeScript 重构一文。下面从研究过程检查这些规则怎样影响实际工作。

  1. 目标验收与范围
  2. 证据结果与限制
  3. 决策继续或换方向
  4. 工作执行与验证
  5. 保留保住最佳有效成果

我们区分起点优势、后续增量和最佳成果保留。更高的最终分数,可能主要来自更强的起点;更好的中间候选,也可能没有留在终态工作区里。运行更久、Todo 更多、图更大,都不能替代这三项判断。

-

1. 先看整个研究过程

时间焦点改变实现
10 月初反馈与实验起点排查盲跑提示、账本与恢复错误;建立原始任务、评分和续跑的边界。#5586, #5844, #5879
10 月 9–11 日原目标与有效反馈保留完整评测响应、候选身份、原始要求;一次实现或提交不能冒充 Goal 完成。#6031, #6039, #6133, #6199
10 月 12–16 日实验步长与恢复点从机械缩小动作,转向 grow / switch / verify;联合保存会话、候选、评测机会和预算,复盘前切换 fresh context。#6298, #6321, #6305, #6622, #6649
10 月中下旬后程改善与成果保留共同窗口拆开起点、后续增量和 best 保留;Schema 的高成本与平台期成为反证。#6440, #6532, #6671
10 月 22–28 日控制面完整成本减少被动轮询和重复读取;核对原 Turn 收尾、完整上下文、差分失效回退及恢复费用。#6983, #7013, #7036, #7197, #7269

按机制改变和可解释的失败选择案例;表中 PR 是阶段锚点,不是逐日全量发布清单。日期表示研究阶段,具体创建、合入及历史资格以链接为准。

2. 先确认反馈值得相信

+

1. 先看整个研究过程

时间焦点改变实现
10 月初反馈与实验起点排查盲跑提示、账本与恢复错误;建立原始任务、评分和续跑的边界。#5586, #5844, #5879
10 月 9–11 日原目标与有效反馈保留完整评测响应、候选身份、原始要求;一次实现或提交不能冒充 Goal 完成。#6031, #6039, #6133, #6199
10 月 12–16 日实验步长与恢复点从机械缩小动作,转向 grow / switch / verify;联合保存会话、候选、评测机会和预算,复盘前切换 fresh context。#6298, #6321, #6305, #6622, #6649
10 月中下旬后程改善与成果保留共同窗口拆开起点、后续增量和 best 保留;Schema 的高成本与平台期成为反证。#6440, #6532, #6671
10 月 22–28 日控制面完整成本减少被动轮询和重复读取;核对原 Turn 收尾、完整上下文、差分失效回退及恢复费用。#6983, #7013, #7036, #7197, #7269
10 月底–11 月初后程平台期突破与五臂归因Astra max 18h 突破四臂 91.94 平台期(+9 个修复声明,0 丢失);ANN 18h 分层消融与跨题五臂归因分离渐进差分、Stride 步长与微调空转成本。#7311, #7759, #7800, #7959, #7960

按机制改变和可解释的失败选择案例;表中 PR 是阶段锚点,不是逐日全量发布清单。日期表示研究阶段,具体创建、合入及历史资格以链接为准。

2. 先确认反馈值得相信

最初的 Portfolio 实验先暴露了测量和执行缺陷。一个盲跑 wrapper 在移除评测入口时,也删掉了迭代优化提示;一个账本检查把更早的市场收益归给了收盘时才买入的持仓。它们都混淆了原本的比较。修复后必须另起尝试,旧结果继续保留。

一个小反例就能说明记账问题:初始现金 100,000,在收盘价 200 时买入 100 单位并支付 10 手续费,即时权益应为 99,990,NAV 为 0.9999;新持仓没有赚到此前从 100 涨到 200 的收益。之后,对两个冻结样本独立重建,各自 243 天全部吻合,权益残差小于 4×10⁻⁹,股数没有差异。这证明账本一致,不证明投资策略优秀。版本化修复见 EdgeBench #14。

续跑也有类似问题:某个工作项结束后,外层进程可以不断唤醒,却没有恢复出有用的下一步。判断必须回到原始目标。Todo 完成之后,可以继续实验、等待或结束,但它本身不能代表 Goal 验收。可靠反馈与恢复让之后的研究变得可解释。

@@ -47,9 +47,14 @@

长任务没做完,何时检查方向?

+
历史批次观察结果含义
Sol/xhigh,新旧 LoopX,Ad Placement · 14h49,589,589,573 → 49,615,495,839新版 2h 时落后、14h 时领先,终态工作区与保留的 best 一致
Astra/xhigh,Official Grid · 6h → 12h1862 → 1810,越低越好更强的基础模型基线仍在后程产生有效改善
Astra max,五臂对照,New Foundations Consistency · 18h91.9412 → 92.3419(2065 → 2074/2246)其余四臂锁死于 ≤91.9412;Explore 臂在 9.65h–17.57h 阶梯式突破,净增 +9 个修复声明且 0 丢失

Ad Placement 说明后程并非必然平台期:后来的差候选被拒绝,最佳版本保住了。原始分领先约 0.052%,幅度不大;这里的终态工作区核验也只覆盖这一臂。新旧包同时改变 core 和 runner,不能当作某个 LoopX feature 的独立效应。

Astra 的结果推进了我们观察到的基础模型能力边界。Official 将速度修改和搜索修改分开,得到连续的原生改善。这项进展属于基础模型/Official 路径,不能算到 LoopX 头上。更强模型也提高了 harness 的要求:面对不断进步的基线,上下文与复盘成本必须换来相应价值。

+

New Foundations Consistency(Astra max,18h):在四臂平台期之后继续突破

+

在 New Foundations Consistency(Astra max,18 小时五臂实证,@shangzh0 归档记录)中,我们观察到了长程探索在 6 小时之后的典型分化:official 基线在 5.72h 触顶 91.9412(2065/2246),随后 11.5 小时内连续 11 次提交零增益;heartbeat-resume 同样锁死在 91.9412,native-goal 与 single 分别停在 91.8077(2062)和 91.6296(2058)。

+
New Foundations Consistency (Astra max, 18h) 五臂轨迹与 6h–18h 局部放大:突破 91.94 平台期至 92.3419
New Foundations Consistency(Astra max,18h)五臂最高有效得分轨迹,内嵌 6h–18h(91.5–92.5 分)局部比例放大。heartbeat-explore 在 9.65h–17.57h 连续四次阶梯式跃升至 92.3419(2074/2246,较 Official 净增 +9 个修复声明、0 丢失)。点击查看原图。
+

如主图与右下角局部放大所示,唯有带证据账本与方向复盘的 heartbeat-explore 在 9.65h 之后跳出平台期(91.99 → 92.03 → 92.07 → 92.25),并在 17.57h 跃升至 92.3419(2074/2246),较 Official 净增 +9 个修复声明且 0 退化丢失。这是单批次五臂描述性轨迹证据,证明当后程复盘真正推动未覆盖声明的分层验证时,第 6–18 小时仍能产出可验证增量;但它同样不保证所有任务都能自动突破——紧接其后的 Schema 就是必须并列审视的反例。

Schema:起点领先不等于持续改善

Schema 是这里展开的反例。Sol 新旧版 14 小时窗口,新版 0.804620、旧版 0.723684。但第一次原生结果已经是 0.794620 对 0.713158,且收到反馈的耗时不同。后续增量仅为 0.010000 和 0.010526。较大的终点优势主要来自起点;后续不断改代码,仍未完成原始六项目标。

另一组 Astra/xhigh 的 12 小时比较更不利:Official 达到 0.881813,LoopX 为 0.786257,两边 6h 到 12h 的 best 都没有提升。LoopX 记录了 36 次完成的压缩,Official 为四次;未缓存输入约为其 5.32 倍。压缩可能与有效工作重叠,版本、恢复、共享负载和评分条件也有差异。但轨迹仍指出了实际挑战:更多改动和控制活动,没有转化为更多验收价值。

@@ -111,6 +116,12 @@

把结构输入单独计量

截至 10 月 28 日的上下文研究让 Grid、Schema、Ad Placement 从原始任务开始,使用 Sol/max,每题最多 18h。可用的历史 Official 或旧 LoopX 作为描述性参考,保留模型/effort、源码、评分器、机会和时钟差异,不冒称严格配对;旧材料无法回答相应问题时再补 base。各次尝试按实际源码、连续性依据和传输路径分别分析,不合并成同一处理。

先核实实际交付确实改变:首次完整读取、声明连续性依据的后续差分、已知基线失效时的完整回退,以及一次从复盘到工作的完整交互。再比较有效进展、成果保留和完整用量。开关、回执、局部小包都不能替代这些证据。Feature 偏离预期时,停止相关尝试,保留其成本和历史,修复后用新的尝试身份重启。

新原生 Hook 路径的首批 Grid、Ad 交互已完成完整分页、一次差分及后续任务工作。同一次捕获内,差分载荷分别比对应完整包小 19.53%、19.48%;这只是一轮读取的载荷比较,不含分页封装、后续模型输入、Hook、恢复或复盘费用,不能外推为总成本下降。完整复盘到后续原生成果、持续收益和故障恢复仍待验证。

效果目标是很多小时之后仍能取得有效进展并保住成果;效率目标是用更低完整成本和人工介入取得同等验收价值。下一份结果需要同时回答它们;这些尝试沿用各自原定截止时间,替换尝试的失败和消耗也保留。

-

这里保留的是 10 月 28 日的研究检查点。2.2.0 的正式发布和默认开启策略,不能让这些未验证项自动通过。机制文章的合成字节测量、发布路径的安装/恢复检查、本节的真实模型轨迹,分别回答机械交付、产品可用性与研究效果问题;版本、窗口和指标不同,不能拼成一项节费结论。

数值分别保留各历史模型、版本、窗口与有效性边界。公开实现:LoopX。早期详细记录保留在上一版文章。这里不发布原始轨迹、隐藏评测材料、运行时凭证或私有操作上下文。

+

这里保留的是 10 月 28 日的研究检查点。2.2.0 的正式发布和默认开启策略,不能让这些未验证项自动通过。机制文章的合成字节测量、发布路径的安装/恢复检查、本节的真实模型轨迹,分别回答机械交付、产品可用性与研究效果问题;版本、窗口和指标不同,不能拼成一项节费结论。

+

11 月初进展:ANN 18h 分层消融与跨任务五臂因果归因

+

在随后的 11 月初实证中,我们进一步补齐了两块关键拼图:

+
    +
  • Context Delivery × Stride 多题与分层消融(ANN 18h,gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh,Recall@10 ≥ 0.95):在 18 小时向量检索任务中,Explore · Context on + Stride 达到 7,159 QPS(较 Official 的 5,753 QPS 提升 +24.4%,较 Explore · Context on 的 6,020 QPS 与 Context off 的 5,766 QPS 进一步跃升)。配对控制包总选中字节下降 38.54%(3.09 MB → 1.90 MB,其中 24 个 Delta 事件裁剪 74.25%),全 18h 主会话未缓存输入 Token 净省 12.07%(8.57M → 7.53M)、总输入净省 7.46%(272.03M → 251.74M)。同时我们完整保留了三项边界反例:project+read 进程 stdout 为选中文件字节的 1.57×–1.83×、前 2 小时早窗未缓存输入因建基线上升至 4.05×(0.25M → 1.00M),以及跨题 Historical Grid 反例(Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242)。完整图表与双轨数据见上下文交付一文的消融实证。
  • +
  • 跨任务五臂轨迹因果归因(Portfolio、Grid、Graph、Ad Placement):在已公开归档的 五臂归因报告(#7960) 与 跨题拐点与重规划损耗分析(#7959) 中,我们对 86 次重规划事件进行了逐次因果回溯:无评测反馈的盲跑(Blind)在 Portfolio 上后程全部退化归零,而原生反馈充当了单向棘轮(Official Native 保住 53.87,Explore 保住 31.19,Stride 达到 35.82);Graph 18h 轨迹揭示第 2.1h(0.7194)才是唯一分类架构突破,第 9.6h 峰值(0.7240)后的 7 轮尝试在线性模型理论天花板(0.73903)下空耗了 1.60 亿输入 Token(占全程 46.0%);引入基于有效工作 Turn 与 grow / switch / verify 的 Stride(evidence_conditioned_v1)后,单次 Replan 的有效跃升转化率从定频 Explore-Off 的 11.4%、Explore-On 的 30.6% 提升至 62.5%,控制面协议税由 23.9% 压降至 12.4%–14.1%。
  • +

数值分别保留各历史模型、版本、窗口与有效性边界。公开实现:LoopX。早期详细记录保留在上一版文章。这里不发布原始轨迹、隐藏评测材料、运行时凭证或私有操作上下文。

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/index.html index c12680f671..ef6b5ae645 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/index.html @@ -35,8 +35,8 @@

LoopX · 博客

长程工作的工程实践。

关于长程 Agent 的设计、工程与实践。

-

Context delivery · 机制与实例

-

Agent 读上下文,也需要一套“查书”的方法

从同一个语音任务出发,讲清 JSON Pointer、批量选择、目录深度、完整要求、精确共享与 compaction 周期差分。合成字节测量与真实模型收益分别说明。

阅读全文
+

Context delivery · 机制与实例

· 11 月 3 日更新实证

+

Agent 读上下文,也需要一套“查书”的方法

从同一个语音任务出发,讲清 JSON Pointer、批量选择、目录深度、完整要求、精确共享与 compaction 周期差分,并补入 ANN 18h(7,159 vs 5,753 QPS)分层字节/Token 消融实证与早窗/跨题边界反例。

阅读全文
-

研究札记 · EdgeBench

· 10 月 29 日修订

-

让 Agent 多做十小时,究竟多做出了什么?

从 10 月初到中下旬的研究过程,看可信反馈、目标、实验步长与恢复怎样被修正;用 Schema 的平台期和完整用量检验后程收益。

阅读全文
+

研究札记 · EdgeBench

· 11 月 3 日修订

+

让 Agent 多做十小时,究竟多做出了什么?

从 10 月初到 11 月初的研究过程,看可信反馈、目标、实验步长与恢复怎样被修正;并列呈现 New Foundations Consistency(Astra max 18h)突破四臂 91.94 平台期、Schema 反例与跨题五臂因果归因。

阅读全文

设计观点 · 系统级自迭代

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html index 1bd52d0d0c..44e576f25c 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/typescript-control-plane-refactor/index.html @@ -178,6 +178,7 @@

6. SQLite 之后:长程历史也要有成本模型

第三,replay 的对象所有权会影响正确性。 #4931 减少未改变子树的复制、排序、编码,以及 receipt lookup 中无用的完整 projection 构造。同时保证返回给调用方的对象被修改后,不会污染下一次 replay 的内部基础状态;持久证明字节也保持不变。

这轮优化在一些路径上有明显收益,但大状态、扫描延迟和内存成本仍有缺口,PR 保留了未达到的目标。把这些差异留下,比给所有路径写一个统一“性能提升”更有用。

10 月的 #5805 又更新了未配置的新建 Goal 默认值,选择 canonical SQLite 与 hard lease。已有 Goal、显式选择和旧 operation retry 继续遵守各自合同。新建默认值、旧数据迁移、旧 writer 退役,是三件发生在不同阶段的事。

+

到 11 月初的 #7834,sqlite_v0 进一步接管了已完成与已替代 Todo 的归档权威(todo_archive 表):在 todo complete 与 todo supersede 提交事务内自动将超出有界窗口(最近 N = 5 条终态项)的历史项迁入 SQLite 归档,使活跃 ACTIVE_GOAL_STATE.md 投影体积与完整历史解耦,同时保留按 ID 精确回读与恢复回执的能力。

7. Song 的 Semantics:定义、生产、解释要接起来

新 maintainer Song(@songoow) 从 9 月 15 日的 #4433 发起并实现 Semantics RFC、registry 和提交路径检查,之后持续推进收敛。这条线让我们开始系统约束“概念怎样增长”。

跨语言迁移很容易产生重复知识:同名状态在 Python Enum、Literal、TS as const、展示层和判断分支中各出现一次。即使今天字符串一样,明天也可能有一处多加了值或换了解释。

@@ -236,6 +237,7 @@

9. 恢复原结果,同时保护当前执行权

当前路径先解码并定位正确权威,核验原身份、意图与回执。确属同一笔已生效操作,就恢复原结果;无匹配原结果的工作,再走当前准入。选定 provider 的可用性与证明仍需要成立,不能在故障后偷偷换到 Markdown。

返回原结果不会续租,不会覆盖后来提交,也不会复活旧 writer。租约转交、epoch 改变和后续状态,都有自己的保护。

类型也表达这种区别:历史解码仍认识 legacy,当前新执行的 handoff 配置只接受 soft_claim 与 hard_lease。旧记录可读、原操作可恢复、当前执行获准,各自有独立条件。

+

2.2.0 的 CLI 原子自认领(#7510、#7793)同样遵循这一边界:单条命令在 hard_lease 下原子完成认领与租约授予,并直接返回绑定当前 lease_epoch 的后续进度写回与完成结算命令;重放旧认领只恢复原回执,不隐式顺延已过期的执行代际。

内部回执保护的范围也有限。一次外部远端 effect 若没有可核验的幂等身份与回读,不能只凭控制面只结算一次,就宣称远端恰好执行一次。unknown 应在它实际发生的边界上保留。

10. CLI 输出约束:压缩前先保护决策语义

对 Agent 来说,CLI 的文字会参与决策。这项工程约束早于最后的 writer 退役,在迁移中继续作为验证边界。

From 0f5a98a9ae6eac0d399c410db3c934f20801a9e3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: huangruiteng Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2026 00:19:36 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] fix(blog): reconcile empirical claims and chart scale Signed-off-by: huangruiteng --- .../edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html | 2 +- .../context-delivery-ablation-en.svg | 80 +++++++++---------- .../context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg | 80 +++++++++---------- .../edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html | 2 +- examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs | 62 ++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 144 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-) diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html index 7b286687fd..d2ac5cabcf 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@

Early-November update: ANN 18h layered ablation and c

Subsequent early-November studies added two pieces of empirical evidence:

  • Context Delivery × Stride multi-task and layered ablation (ANN 18h, gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, Recall@10 ≥ 0.95): Across 18-hour vector-search runs, Explore · Context on + Stride reached 7,159 QPS (+24.4% over Official at 5,753 QPS, and ahead of Explore · Context on at 6,020 QPS and Context off at 5,766 QPS). Paired control-packet selected bytes fell 38.54% (3.09 MB → 1.90 MB, with 24 delta events reduced by 74.25%), while full-18h main-session uncached input tokens fell 12.07% (8.57M → 7.53M) and total input tokens fell 7.46% (272.03M → 251.74M). Alongside these gains, we retain three explicit boundary counterexamples: project+read process stdout was 1.57×–1.83× raw selected file bytes, first-2h early-window uncached input tokens rose 4.05× (0.25M → 1.00M) during initial baseline establishment, and the cross-task Historical Grid counterexample ordered Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242. Full charts and dual-track accounting appear in the context-delivery ablation section.
  • -
  • Cross-task five-arm causal attribution (Portfolio, Grid, Graph, Ad Placement): In the reproducible five-arm attribution report (#7960) and cross-task inflection & replan overhead study (#7959), tracing 86 replan events showed that blind runs without evaluator feedback collapsed to 0.00 on Portfolio whereas native feedback acted as a monotonic ratchet (Official Native retained 53.87, Explore 31.19, Stride 35.82); on Graph 18h, the true classification breakthrough occurred at 2.1h (0.7194) while 7 post-peak attempts after 9.6h (0.7240) spent 159.87M input tokens (46.0% of budget) against the linear-model theoretical ceiling (0.73903); and replacing fixed 3-Todo reviews with effective-Turn Stride (evidence_conditioned_v1) raised valid-jump conversion from 11.4% (Explore-Off) and 30.6% (Explore-On) to 62.5% while reducing control-plane protocol tax from 23.9% to 12.4%–14.1%.
  • +
  • Cross-task five-arm trajectory attribution (Portfolio, Grid, Graph, Ad Placement): In these reproduced five-arm attribution report (#7960) and cross-task inflection & replan overhead study (#7959), the five-arm taxonomy labels 86 classified replan events, while the three managed-arm totals are 44 + 36 + 24 = 104; valid-jump counts likewise differ (27 taxonomy vs 5 + 11 + 15 = 31). We therefore present 5/44 = 11.4%, 11/36 = 30.6% and 15/24 = 62.5% as arm-local ratios, without claiming one reconciled common denominator or cross-arm causal total. The reports also describe native-feedback retention on Portfolio (Official Native 53.87, Explore 31.19, Stride 35.82) and an observed Graph increase from 0.7194 at 2.1h to 0.7240 at 9.6h, followed by 7 post-peak attempts consuming 159.87M input tokens. The report’s fixed-classification formula evaluates to 0.74329, not its recorded 0.73903; it is a conditional estimate for that fixed component vector, not an upper bound on every linear model or proof that later work was necessarily wasted. The same reports record protocol tax from 23.9% to 12.4%–14.1% descriptively.

Numerical evidence retains each stated historical model, version, window and validity boundary. Public implementation: LoopX. Earlier detailed research records remain in the previous article revision. Raw trajectories, hidden evaluator material, runtime credentials and private operating context are not published here.

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg index 1330ab1e1c..136f2e8bf1 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg @@ -330,17 +330,17 @@ L 347.06794 322.750472 - - + - -50 + -50 @@ -360,47 +360,47 @@ L 514.451821 322.750472 - - + - 50 + 100 - - + - 100 + 200 - - + - 150 + 300 @@ -501,91 +501,91 @@ L 824.112 569.664 - -74.25% (delta-event byte reduction) + -74.25% (delta-event byte reduction) - -38.54% (3,089,841 B → 1,898,889 B) + -38.54% (3,089,841 B → 1,898,889 B) - -25.75% (Stride arm, 34 events) + -25.75% (Stride arm, 34 events) - -12.07% (8.57M → 7.53M tokens) + -12.07% (8.57M → 7.53M tokens) - -7.91% (16h common window) + -7.91% (16h common window) - -7.46% (272.03M → 251.74M, responses -6.46%) + -7.46% (272.03M → 251.74M, responses -6.46%) - +57% to +83% (stdout is 1.57x–1.83x selected bytes) + +57% to +83% (stdout is 1.57x–1.83x selected bytes) - +304.7% (4.05x first-2h early-window counterexample) + +304.7% (4.05x first-2h early-window counterexample) B. Layered Accounting Audit: Control-Packet Bytes, Main-Session Input Tokens & Boundary Counterexamples diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg index 1f71edd608..cc3b5810c3 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg @@ -330,17 +330,17 @@ L 347.06794 322.750472 - - + - -50 + -50 @@ -360,47 +360,47 @@ L 514.451821 322.750472 - - + - 50 + 100 - - + - 100 + 200 - - + - 150 + 300 @@ -501,91 +501,91 @@ L 824.112 569.664 - -74.25%(增量事件裁剪率) + -74.25%(增量事件裁剪率) - -38.54%(3,089,841 B → 1,898,889 B) + -38.54%(3,089,841 B → 1,898,889 B) - -25.75%(Stride 臂 34 事件) + -25.75%(Stride 臂 34 事件) - -12.07%(8.57M → 7.53M tokens) + -12.07%(8.57M → 7.53M tokens) - -7.91%(16h 公共窗口) + -7.91%(16h 公共窗口) - -7.46%(272.03M → 251.74M,响应数 -6.46%) + -7.46%(272.03M → 251.74M,响应数 -6.46%) - +57% ~ +83%(stdout 为选中字节的 1.57x–1.83x) + +57% ~ +83%(stdout 为选中字节的 1.57x–1.83x) - +304.7%(4.05x,前 2h 早窗反例) + +304.7%(4.05x,前 2h 早窗反例) B. 分层计量审计:控制包选中字节、主会话输入 Token 净节省与局部边界反例 diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html index aee6805483..97fb31df41 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@

11 月初进展:ANN 18h 分层消融与跨任务五

在随后的 11 月初实证中,我们进一步补齐了两块关键拼图:

  • Context Delivery × Stride 多题与分层消融(ANN 18h,gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh,Recall@10 ≥ 0.95):在 18 小时向量检索任务中,Explore · Context on + Stride 达到 7,159 QPS(较 Official 的 5,753 QPS 提升 +24.4%,较 Explore · Context on 的 6,020 QPS 与 Context off 的 5,766 QPS 进一步跃升)。配对控制包总选中字节下降 38.54%(3.09 MB → 1.90 MB,其中 24 个 Delta 事件裁剪 74.25%),全 18h 主会话未缓存输入 Token 净省 12.07%(8.57M → 7.53M)、总输入净省 7.46%(272.03M → 251.74M)。同时我们完整保留了三项边界反例:project+read 进程 stdout 为选中文件字节的 1.57×–1.83×、前 2 小时早窗未缓存输入因建基线上升至 4.05×(0.25M → 1.00M),以及跨题 Historical Grid 反例(Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242)。完整图表与双轨数据见上下文交付一文的消融实证。
  • -
  • 跨任务五臂轨迹因果归因(Portfolio、Grid、Graph、Ad Placement):在已公开归档的 五臂归因报告(#7960) 与 跨题拐点与重规划损耗分析(#7959) 中,我们对 86 次重规划事件进行了逐次因果回溯:无评测反馈的盲跑(Blind)在 Portfolio 上后程全部退化归零,而原生反馈充当了单向棘轮(Official Native 保住 53.87,Explore 保住 31.19,Stride 达到 35.82);Graph 18h 轨迹揭示第 2.1h(0.7194)才是唯一分类架构突破,第 9.6h 峰值(0.7240)后的 7 轮尝试在线性模型理论天花板(0.73903)下空耗了 1.60 亿输入 Token(占全程 46.0%);引入基于有效工作 Turn 与 grow / switch / verify 的 Stride(evidence_conditioned_v1)后,单次 Replan 的有效跃升转化率从定频 Explore-Off 的 11.4%、Explore-On 的 30.6% 提升至 62.5%,控制面协议税由 23.9% 压降至 12.4%–14.1%。
  • +
  • 跨任务五臂轨迹归因(Portfolio、Grid、Graph、Ad Placement):在这些公开可复现的 五臂归因报告(#7960) 与 跨题拐点与重规划损耗分析(#7959) 中,分类表标记了 86 次已分类 Replan 事件,但三个受管臂的小计为 44 + 36 + 24 = 104;有效跃升数也不一致(分类表 27 次,分臂合计 5 + 11 + 15 = 31 次)。因此这里只把 5/44 = 11.4%、11/36 = 30.6%、15/24 = 62.5% 作为各臂自身比例,不声称它们共享一个已对账的统一分母,也不据此给出跨臂因果总量。报告还描述了 Portfolio 的原生反馈保留(Official Native 53.87、Explore 31.19、Stride 35.82),以及 Graph 从 2.1h 的 0.7194 升至 9.6h 的 0.7240 后,7 轮峰后尝试消耗 159.87M 输入 Token。报告中的固定分类分量公式复算为 0.74329,并非记录值 0.73903;它只是该固定分量向量的条件估算,不是所有线性模型的上界,也不能证明后续尝试必然无效。同一报告记录的控制面协议税从 23.9% 降至 12.4%–14.1%,这里保持为描述性结果。

数值分别保留各历史模型、版本、窗口与有效性边界。公开实现:LoopX。早期详细记录保留在上一版文章。这里不发布原始轨迹、隐藏评测材料、运行时凭证或私有操作上下文。

diff --git a/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs b/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs index cf27f6d612..bcfd3fdca9 100644 --- a/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs +++ b/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs @@ -146,6 +146,7 @@ export async function validateBilingualBlog(blogDir) { } await validateEventClockLabels(blogDir); + await validateEmpiricalEvidenceClaims(blogDir); return { articleSlugs: englishSlugs }; } @@ -204,6 +205,67 @@ async function validateEventClockLabels(blogDir) { } } +const EMPIRICAL_CLAIM_CONTRACTS = [ + { + article: "edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html", + required: [ + "44 + 36 + 24 = 104", + "27 taxonomy vs 5 + 11 + 15 = 31", + "0.74329", + "conditional estimate for that fixed component vector", + ], + rejected: "tracing 86 replan events", + }, + { + article: "zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html", + required: [ + "44 + 36 + 24 = 104", + "分类表 27 次,分臂合计 5 + 11 + 15 = 31 次", + "0.74329", + "固定分量向量的条件估算", + ], + rejected: "对 86 次重规划事件进行了逐次因果回溯", + }, +]; + +async function validateEmpiricalEvidenceClaims(blogDir) { + const fixedComponentEstimate = 0.4 * 0.7088 + 0.3 * 0.7251 + 0.2 * 0.7112 + 0.1; + if (Math.abs(fixedComponentEstimate - 0.74329) > 1e-6) { + throw new Error("Graph fixed-component arithmetic drifted"); + } + for (const contract of EMPIRICAL_CLAIM_CONTRACTS) { + const article = await readFile(resolve(blogDir, contract.article), "utf8"); + for (const value of contract.required) { + assertIncludes(article, value, `Empirical article must retain reconciled claim: ${contract.article} ${value}`); + } + if (article.includes(contract.rejected)) { + throw new Error(`Empirical article restored an unreconciled total: ${contract.article}`); + } + } + for (const figure of [ + "images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-en.svg", + "images/context-delivery/context-delivery-ablation-zh.svg", + ]) { + const svg = await readFile(resolve(blogDir, figure), "utf8"); + const ticks = new Map( + [...svg.matchAll(/]*x="([\d.]+)" y="585\.694"[^>]*>(-?\d+)<\/text>/g)] + .map((match) => [Number(match[2]), Number(match[1])]), + ); + const zero = ticks.get(0), tenth = ticks.get(300); + if (zero === undefined || tenth === undefined) { + throw new Error(`Ablation chart must expose a linear 0–300 percent axis: ${figure}`); + } + const patch = svg.match(/([\s\S]*?)<\/g>/)?.[1]; + const points = patch ? [...patch.matchAll(/[ML] ([\d.]+) /g)].map((match) => Number(match[1])) : []; + if (points.length < 2) throw new Error(`Ablation chart is missing its 304.7% bar: ${figure}`); + const expected = zero + 304.7 * ((tenth - zero) / 300); + if (Math.abs(points[1] - expected) > 0.11) { + throw new Error(`Ablation chart must plot +304.7% at linear scale: ${figure}`); + } + assertIncludes(svg, "+304.7%", `Ablation chart must label the corrected bar: ${figure}`); + } +} + // Minimal element model for the sorting module. It keeps only the two browser // facts that module depends on: children are read in live order, and detaching a // card blurs whatever was focused inside it. The packaged page is checked in a From 8aac5afbd5d1a543ad7f6ac989b086c0246774fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: huangruiteng Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2026 00:26:50 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] docs(blog): scope five-arm evidence below C2 Signed-off-by: huangruiteng --- .../site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html | 4 ++-- .../public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html | 4 ++-- examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs | 2 ++ 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html index d2ac5cabcf..50c34077b9 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html @@ -117,11 +117,11 @@

Measure structural input separately

First verify that actual delivery changes: the initial full read, a subsequent delta with its continuity basis stated, complete fallback after known baseline loss, and a full review-to-work interaction. Then compare useful progress, retained artifacts and the complete usage vector. Requested flags, receipts and smaller local packets cannot substitute for that evidence. If the feature fails its intended behavior, stop the affected attempt, preserve its costs and history, repair it and use a new attempt identity.

The first Grid and Ad interactions on the new native Hook path have completed full paging, one delta and subsequent task work. Within each same capture, the delta payload was 19.53% and 19.48% smaller than its corresponding full packet. These are single-read payload comparisons: they exclude page envelopes, subsequent model input, hooks, recovery and review costs. They do not establish lower total cost. A complete review-to-native-outcome cycle, sustained benefit and failure recovery remain to be verified.

Our effectiveness target is useful progress after many hours and reliable retention of it. Our efficiency target is comparable accepted value with less complete cost and human attention. The next result must address both. Current runs retain the original deadline, and failed or replaced attempts retain their costs and history.

This remains the October 28 research checkpoint. The 2.2.0 release and default-on policy do not automatically pass its unresolved checks. The mechanism article’s synthetic byte measurements, release-path installation/recovery checks, and this section’s real model trajectories answer questions about mechanical delivery, product usability and research effectiveness respectively. Their versions, windows and metrics differ; they are not a combined savings result.

-

Early-November update: ANN 18h layered ablation and cross-task five-arm causal attribution

+

Early-November update: ANN 18h layered ablation and cross-task five-arm trajectory attribution

Subsequent early-November studies added two pieces of empirical evidence:

  • Context Delivery × Stride multi-task and layered ablation (ANN 18h, gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh, Recall@10 ≥ 0.95): Across 18-hour vector-search runs, Explore · Context on + Stride reached 7,159 QPS (+24.4% over Official at 5,753 QPS, and ahead of Explore · Context on at 6,020 QPS and Context off at 5,766 QPS). Paired control-packet selected bytes fell 38.54% (3.09 MB → 1.90 MB, with 24 delta events reduced by 74.25%), while full-18h main-session uncached input tokens fell 12.07% (8.57M → 7.53M) and total input tokens fell 7.46% (272.03M → 251.74M). Alongside these gains, we retain three explicit boundary counterexamples: project+read process stdout was 1.57×–1.83× raw selected file bytes, first-2h early-window uncached input tokens rose 4.05× (0.25M → 1.00M) during initial baseline establishment, and the cross-task Historical Grid counterexample ordered Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242. Full charts and dual-track accounting appear in the context-delivery ablation section.
  • -
  • Cross-task five-arm trajectory attribution (Portfolio, Grid, Graph, Ad Placement): In these reproduced five-arm attribution report (#7960) and cross-task inflection & replan overhead study (#7959), the five-arm taxonomy labels 86 classified replan events, while the three managed-arm totals are 44 + 36 + 24 = 104; valid-jump counts likewise differ (27 taxonomy vs 5 + 11 + 15 = 31). We therefore present 5/44 = 11.4%, 11/36 = 30.6% and 15/24 = 62.5% as arm-local ratios, without claiming one reconciled common denominator or cross-arm causal total. The reports also describe native-feedback retention on Portfolio (Official Native 53.87, Explore 31.19, Stride 35.82) and an observed Graph increase from 0.7194 at 2.1h to 0.7240 at 9.6h, followed by 7 post-peak attempts consuming 159.87M input tokens. The report’s fixed-classification formula evaluates to 0.74329, not its recorded 0.73903; it is a conditional estimate for that fixed component vector, not an upper bound on every linear model or proof that later work was necessarily wasted. The same reports record protocol tax from 23.9% to 12.4%–14.1% descriptively.
  • +
  • Cross-task five-arm trajectory attribution (Portfolio, Grid, Graph, Ad Placement): In these reproduced five-arm attribution report (#7960) and cross-task inflection & replan overhead study (#7959), the five-arm taxonomy labels 86 classified replan events, while the three managed-arm totals are 44 + 36 + 24 = 104; valid-jump counts likewise differ (27 taxonomy vs 5 + 11 + 15 = 31). We therefore present 5/44 = 11.4%, 11/36 = 30.6% and 15/24 = 62.5% as arm-local ratios, without claiming one reconciled common denominator or cross-arm causal total. These are descriptive, arm-local observations rather than a matched repeated C2 comparison and do not justify a production default change. The reports also describe native-feedback retention on Portfolio (Official Native 53.87, Explore 31.19, Stride 35.82) and an observed Graph increase from 0.7194 at 2.1h to 0.7240 at 9.6h, followed by 7 post-peak attempts consuming 159.87M input tokens. The report’s fixed-classification formula evaluates to 0.74329, not its recorded 0.73903; it is a conditional estimate for that fixed component vector, not an upper bound on every linear model or proof that later work was necessarily wasted. The same reports record protocol tax from 23.9% to 12.4%–14.1% descriptively.

Numerical evidence retains each stated historical model, version, window and validity boundary. Public implementation: LoopX. Earlier detailed research records remain in the previous article revision. Raw trajectories, hidden evaluator material, runtime credentials and private operating context are not published here.

diff --git a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html index 97fb31df41..878cb80546 100644 --- a/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html +++ b/apps/presentation/site/public/blog/zh/edgebench-feedback-and-memory/index.html @@ -117,11 +117,11 @@

把结构输入单独计量

先核实实际交付确实改变:首次完整读取、声明连续性依据的后续差分、已知基线失效时的完整回退,以及一次从复盘到工作的完整交互。再比较有效进展、成果保留和完整用量。开关、回执、局部小包都不能替代这些证据。Feature 偏离预期时,停止相关尝试,保留其成本和历史,修复后用新的尝试身份重启。

新原生 Hook 路径的首批 Grid、Ad 交互已完成完整分页、一次差分及后续任务工作。同一次捕获内,差分载荷分别比对应完整包小 19.53%、19.48%;这只是一轮读取的载荷比较,不含分页封装、后续模型输入、Hook、恢复或复盘费用,不能外推为总成本下降。完整复盘到后续原生成果、持续收益和故障恢复仍待验证。

效果目标是很多小时之后仍能取得有效进展并保住成果;效率目标是用更低完整成本和人工介入取得同等验收价值。下一份结果需要同时回答它们;这些尝试沿用各自原定截止时间,替换尝试的失败和消耗也保留。

这里保留的是 10 月 28 日的研究检查点。2.2.0 的正式发布和默认开启策略,不能让这些未验证项自动通过。机制文章的合成字节测量、发布路径的安装/恢复检查、本节的真实模型轨迹,分别回答机械交付、产品可用性与研究效果问题;版本、窗口和指标不同,不能拼成一项节费结论。

-

11 月初进展:ANN 18h 分层消融与跨任务五臂因果归因

+

11 月初进展:ANN 18h 分层消融与跨任务五臂轨迹归因

在随后的 11 月初实证中,我们进一步补齐了两块关键拼图:

  • Context Delivery × Stride 多题与分层消融(ANN 18h,gpt-6.1-sol / xhigh,Recall@10 ≥ 0.95):在 18 小时向量检索任务中,Explore · Context on + Stride 达到 7,159 QPS(较 Official 的 5,753 QPS 提升 +24.4%,较 Explore · Context on 的 6,020 QPS 与 Context off 的 5,766 QPS 进一步跃升)。配对控制包总选中字节下降 38.54%(3.09 MB → 1.90 MB,其中 24 个 Delta 事件裁剪 74.25%),全 18h 主会话未缓存输入 Token 净省 12.07%(8.57M → 7.53M)、总输入净省 7.46%(272.03M → 251.74M)。同时我们完整保留了三项边界反例:project+read 进程 stdout 为选中文件字节的 1.57×–1.83×、前 2 小时早窗未缓存输入因建基线上升至 4.05×(0.25M → 1.00M),以及跨题 Historical Grid 反例(Official 1967 < Off 2054 < On+Stride 2088 < On 2242)。完整图表与双轨数据见上下文交付一文的消融实证。
  • -
  • 跨任务五臂轨迹归因(Portfolio、Grid、Graph、Ad Placement):在这些公开可复现的 五臂归因报告(#7960) 与 跨题拐点与重规划损耗分析(#7959) 中,分类表标记了 86 次已分类 Replan 事件,但三个受管臂的小计为 44 + 36 + 24 = 104;有效跃升数也不一致(分类表 27 次,分臂合计 5 + 11 + 15 = 31 次)。因此这里只把 5/44 = 11.4%、11/36 = 30.6%、15/24 = 62.5% 作为各臂自身比例,不声称它们共享一个已对账的统一分母,也不据此给出跨臂因果总量。报告还描述了 Portfolio 的原生反馈保留(Official Native 53.87、Explore 31.19、Stride 35.82),以及 Graph 从 2.1h 的 0.7194 升至 9.6h 的 0.7240 后,7 轮峰后尝试消耗 159.87M 输入 Token。报告中的固定分类分量公式复算为 0.74329,并非记录值 0.73903;它只是该固定分量向量的条件估算,不是所有线性模型的上界,也不能证明后续尝试必然无效。同一报告记录的控制面协议税从 23.9% 降至 12.4%–14.1%,这里保持为描述性结果。
  • +
  • 跨任务五臂轨迹归因(Portfolio、Grid、Graph、Ad Placement):在这些公开可复现的 五臂归因报告(#7960) 与 跨题拐点与重规划损耗分析(#7959) 中,分类表标记了 86 次已分类 Replan 事件,但三个受管臂的小计为 44 + 36 + 24 = 104;有效跃升数也不一致(分类表 27 次,分臂合计 5 + 11 + 15 = 31 次)。因此这里只把 5/44 = 11.4%、11/36 = 30.6%、15/24 = 62.5% 作为各臂自身比例,不声称它们共享一个已对账的统一分母,也不据此给出跨臂因果总量。这些只是描述性的单臂观察,不是经过匹配重复的 C2 比较,也不足以改变生产默认配置。报告还描述了 Portfolio 的原生反馈保留(Official Native 53.87、Explore 31.19、Stride 35.82),以及 Graph 从 2.1h 的 0.7194 升至 9.6h 的 0.7240 后,7 轮峰后尝试消耗 159.87M 输入 Token。报告中的固定分类分量公式复算为 0.74329,并非记录值 0.73903;它只是该固定分量向量的条件估算,不是所有线性模型的上界,也不能证明后续尝试必然无效。同一报告记录的控制面协议税从 23.9% 降至 12.4%–14.1%,这里保持为描述性结果。
diff --git a/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs b/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs index bcfd3fdca9..6883902c14 100644 --- a/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs +++ b/examples/blog-bilingual-index-smoke.mjs @@ -211,6 +211,7 @@ const EMPIRICAL_CLAIM_CONTRACTS = [ required: [ "44 + 36 + 24 = 104", "27 taxonomy vs 5 + 11 + 15 = 31", + "rather than a matched repeated C2 comparison", "0.74329", "conditional estimate for that fixed component vector", ], @@ -221,6 +222,7 @@ const EMPIRICAL_CLAIM_CONTRACTS = [ required: [ "44 + 36 + 24 = 104", "分类表 27 次,分臂合计 5 + 11 + 15 = 31 次", + "不是经过匹配重复的 C2 比较", "0.74329", "固定分量向量的条件估算", ],