Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

RFC: separate deterministic confidence decay from observer reasoning #2042

annexiao started this conversation in Ideas
Discussion options

Been using continuous-learning-v2 for a while and the instinct architecture is genuinely well-designed (confidence scoring + auto-load at SessionStart works better than I expected). Your X posts about ECC have been good reading too. Both have shifted how I think about a few things.

One thing I noticed in v2: the decay rule in agents/observer.md line 148 (-0.02 per week without observation) appears to be implemented as a prompt instruction to the Haiku observer agent. That works conceptually, but it makes the decay behavior harder to reason about, test, or dry-run. Since time-based decay is basically mechanical, I wonder if it should be handled outside the observer prompt.

The local change I tried was to split the two concerns currently bundled in observer.md:

  • Haiku keeps doing pattern recognition and evidence-driven confidence adjustments.
  • Time-based decay moves to a small Python script that reads file mtime as the last-evidence timestamp and applies a flat per-week decay.

One thing I am less sure about is the decay rate itself. The current -0.02 per week rate seems to carry an implicit assumption that if a user has not seen a pattern recently, the instinct is probably stale. That may be true for some workflows, but it feels weaker now. I find myself working across more stacks and domains thanks to coding agents, and I doubt I am the only one. In that setting, "I have not touched this domain in three months" may mean variety is up, not that the instinct is wrong. A more aggressive decay can end up penalizing rare butvalid instincts rather than stale ones.

A few open questions before I turn this into a PR:

  1. Should the default rate be lower? I tried -0.005/week, but that is a judgment call
  2. Where should the rate be configured: env var, CLI arg, or config field?
  3. Should deterministic decay be opt-in first, with the current observer-based decay kept as the default?
  4. Should scheduling guidance live in SKILL.md, or should the repo stay scheduler-agnostic and just document the script?

Happy to send a small PR if this direction lands.

You must be logged in to vote

Replies: 1 comment

Comment options

might need to add another parameter into the function or reformulate, will look into this.

You must be logged in to vote
0 replies
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Category
Ideas
Labels
None yet

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /