Repository navigation
experiment: learn state selection, retrieval routing, and observe-vs-act from verified trajectories #24
Description
Agent priority — 2026-09-29 work audit
P1 after the State Packet cohort is frozen.
The first learned-policy experiment should use the smallest bounded decision family:
ACT | OBSERVE_MORE | ESCALATE
Input comes from the frozen State Packet/current-work cohort, not from synthetic labels invented for this issue.
Required order:
- deterministic/rule baseline;
- frozen grouped split by project/work lineage;
- one simple statistical baseline;
- one small learned selector in shadow-only mode;
- system-cost + verified-transition metrics;
- promotion/rollback decision.
Upstream runtime: kvnloo/z0intelligence#22
Frozen eval: kvnloo/z0evals#56
Do not give a learned selector authority over illegal transitions, and do not treat teacher/JEV agreement as ground truth.
Goal
Use verified z0intelligence trajectories to learn small, fast policies for navigating the intelligence stack.
Do not train a general replacement agent.
Target narrow functions that reduce expensive frontier-model work:
- query/facet routing
- entity linking
- ontology-slice activation
- state relevance selection
- blocking-unknown scoring
- observe-vs-act selection
- cache/state-packet selection
- verification anomaly detection
Training record
The upstream runtime should emit replayable trajectories:
intent
selected state / State Packet
candidate claims
unknowns
retrieved evidence refs
retrieval cost
action / transition
outcome
independent verification
later correction / contradiction
The key target is not "retrieval relevance."
It is:
Did the selected state contain the minimum sufficient information for a correct verified transition?
Baselines
Always compare learned approaches against:
- deterministic/rule selector
- lexical/metadata routing
- simple ranking/logistic/ridge model
- small MLP where appropriate
- frontier teacher
JEV/OpenJev may score a bounded legal action set, but teacher agreement alone is not ground truth.
Eval groups
Prevent leakage across related conversations/work:
event
-> trace/session
-> attempt lineage
-> project/work item
-> task family
-> harness/environment
Hold out complete projects/task families where feasible.
Metrics
Measure both decision quality and systems cost:
- verified transition success
- missed blocking unknowns
- false-block rate
- correction/retry rate
- abstention/risk coverage
- raw documents opened
- retrieval calls
- tokens
- latency
- cache hit/select accuracy
- frontier-model calls avoided
First experiment
Start with one bounded decision family from the State Compiler:
ACT
OBSERVE_MORE
ESCALATE
Inputs are a compact semantic state + bounded legal options.
Run learned policies shadow-only.
Distillation path
If the data supports it, progressively test:
frontier teacher
-> local SLM
-> tiny specialist
-> JEV-style scorer / rules
Promote per question family only.
Acceptance
- stable versioned trajectory schema
- frozen grouped train/eval split
- deterministic baseline
- one small learned selector tested shadow-only
- outcomes joined independently from model labels
- system-cost metrics reported alongside predictive metrics
- no learned model receives authority over illegal transitions
- clear promotion/rollback criteria
Activity
kvnloo commentedon Sep 30, 2026
UFD linkage: DecisionOpportunity/state RFC kvnloo/z0intelligence#53 and selective-autonomy RFC kvnloo/z0intelligence#55.
Keep this as the first bounded learned-control experiment, but let the contract use the broader ACT / OBSERVE_MORE / ASK / ABSTAIN / ESCALATE semantics where the cohort supports them. The experiment should test whether learned risk/coverage adds value over deterministic gates + unconditional escalation.