claude-opus-4-8

/tmp/s_E.json size 60001 cover12M at 18456 comp(M) wiki 4.8 web 4.6 news 2.2 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_E.json
E ('5.2', '4.4', '2.0', '0.4', '0.38', '3584') :: FULL 360.5  wiki 664.5  web 271.5  news 271.0  qa 344.5
/tmp/s_F.json size 60001 cover12M at 18101 comp(M) wiki 4.9 web 4.7 news 2.0 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_F.json
F ('4.9', '4.7', '2.2', '0.4', '0.35', '4096') :: FULL 351.1  wiki 637.5  web 272.9  news 261.8  qa 332.9
/tmp/s_G.json size 60001 cover12M at 18555 comp(M) wiki 4.7 web 4.7 news 2.2 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_G.json
G ('4.9', '4.7', '2.2', '0.4', '0.40', '3584') :: FULL 344.9  wiki 650.6  web 269.3  news 265.1  qa 303.6
/tmp/s_H.json size 60001 cover12M at 18030 comp(M) wiki 5.1 web 4.4 news 2.0 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_H.json
time:
3038

[stdout]
/tmp/s_E.json size 60001 cover12M at 18456 comp(M) wiki 4.8 web 4.6 news 2.2 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_E.json
E ('5.2', '4.4', '2.0', '0.4', '0.38', '3584') :: FULL 360.5  wiki 664.5  web 271.5  news 271.0  qa 344.5
/tmp/s_F.json size 60001 cover12M at 18101 comp(M) wiki 4.9 web 4.7 news 2.0 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_F.json
F ('4.9', '4.7', '2.2', '0.4', '0.35', '4096') :: FULL 351.1  wiki 637.5  web 272.9  news 261.8  qa 332.9
/tmp/s_G.json size 60001 cover12M at 18555 comp(M) wiki 4.7 web 4.7 news 2.2 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_G.json
G ('4.9', '4.7', '2.2', '0.4', '0.40', '3584') :: FULL 344.9  wiki 650.6  web 269.3  news 265.1  qa 303.6
/tmp/s_H.json size 60001 cover12M at 18030 comp(M) wiki 5.1 web 4.4 news 2.0 qa 0.4
packed 12000000 tokens from /tmp/s_H.json
time:
3038
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

H ('5.4', '4.3', '1.9', '0.4', '0.33', '4096') :: FULL 343.2  wiki 638.8  web 268.1  news 266.9  qa 302.8

[stdout]
H ('5.4', '4.3', '1.9', '0.4', '0.33', '4096') :: FULL 343.2  wiki 638.8  web 268.1  news 266.9  qa 302.8
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

File created successfully at: /workspace/submission/curate.py (file state is current in your context — no need to Read it back)

[metadata] {"type": "create", "filePath": "/workspace/submission/curate.py", "content": "#!/usr/bin/env python3\n\"\"\"Curate a raw web pool into a pretraining selection for a small LM whose target\nis a BROAD, equal-parts multi-domain high-quality English corpus:\n    quarter 0 = encyclopedic (Wikipedia)   quarter 1 = high-quality web prose\n    quarter 2 = news                        quarter 3 = technical Q&A\n\nSTATED CRITERION\n----------------\nKeep a document iff it is (a) clean natural-language prose (Gopher/C4-style\nquality filters) and (b) *distinctively* on-domain for one of the four target\nregisters, then fill a per-register token budget with the best-matching docs.\n\nTwo ideas do the work:\n  1. Per-register match. We build a hashed word (uni+bi)gram Naive-Bayes\n     log-likelihood-ratio between EACH target register (a quarter of the dev\n     reference) and the pool background. Each doc gets 4 scores; its register is\n     the argmax and its match score is that max.\n  2. Anti-spam via cross-register SPREAD. SEO word-salad matches every register\n     weakly and uniformly (small spread); genuine register-specific prose scores\n     high on its own register and very low on the others (large spread). We drop\n     any doc whose (max-min) across the 4 register scores is below a threshold.\n     This single test removes machine-spun keyword-stuffing that the vocabulary\n     filters let through.\n\nAllocation is deliberately UNequal even though the target is equal-parts: the\npool is rich in generic web prose but poor in encyclopedic text and nearly devoid\nof technical Q&A, and the encyclopedic register is by far the hardest / most\ndata-hungry for the model. We therefore give Wikipedia-like and web docs the\nlargest budgets, a moderate budget to news (which saturates quickly), and take\nALL available Q&A (scarce but disproportionately valuable). Priority order is a\nweighted round-robin so the first 12M tokens the trainer consumes stay balanced.\n\nDeterministic: re-exec with PYTHONHASHSEED=0 so the feature hashing is stable.\n\"\"\"\nimport os, sys\nif os.environ.get(\"PYTHONHASHSEED\") != \"0\":\n    os.environ[\"PYTHONHASHSEED\"] = \"0\"\n    os.execv(sys.executable, [sys.executable] + sys.argv)\n\nimport json, re, numpy as np\nfrom transformers import AutoTokenizer\n\nPOOL = \"/workspace/data/pool.jsonl\"\nDEV  = \"/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy\"      # the disclosed 4-register reference\nOUT  = \"/workspace/submission/selection.json\"\n\n# ---- feature hashing -------------------------------------------------------\nD = 1 << 20; MASK = D - 1\n_word = re.compile(r\"[a-z0-9']+\")\ndef ngram_hashes(text):\n    toks = _word.findall(text.lower()); h = []; prev = None\n    for w in toks:\n        h.append(hash(w) & MASK)\n        if prev is not None:\n            h.append(hash(prev + \" \" + w) & MASK)\n        prev = w\n    return np.array(h, dtype=np.int64)\n\n# ---- prose-quality features (Gopher/C4 style) ------------------------------\nSTOP = set(\"the of and to a in is that it for on with as was are be by this an at \"\n           \"from or not but have has had he she they we you i his her their its \"\n           \"which will would can s\".split())\ndef quality(text):\n    n = len(text); words = text.split(); nw = len(words)\n    if n == 0 or nw == 0:\n        return None\n    alpha = sum(c.isalpha() for c in text); digit = sum(c.isdigit() for c in text)\n    lw = [w.lower() for w in words]\n    mwl = sum(len(w) for w in words) / nw                       # mean word length\n    sw  = sum(1 for w in lw if w in STOP) / nw                  # stopword fraction\n    fa  = sum(1 for w in words if any(c.isalpha() for c in w)) / nw\n    lines = text.split(\"\\n\")\n    ul  = len(set(l.strip() for l in lines)) / max(1, len(lines))  # unique-line frac\n    uw  = len(set(lw)) / nw                                     # type/token ratio\n    return (mwl, alpha / n, digit / n, sw, fa, ul, uw)\n\ndef passes_quality(toklen, q):\n    mwl, alr, dgr, sw, fa, ul, uw = q\n    return (LMIN <= toklen <= LMAX and 3 <= mwl <= 10 and alr >= 0.65 and\n            dgr <= 0.15 and sw >= 0.15 and fa >= 0.80 and ul >= 0.40 and\n            0.35 <= uw <= 0.85)\n\n# ---- hyper-parameters (selected on the dev target) -------------------------\nLMIN, LMAX   = 128, 3584          # token-length window\nSPREAD_MIN   = 0.38               # anti-spam: min cross-register score spread\nCAPS_M       = [4.9, 4.7, 2.2, 0.4]   # per-register token budgets (millions)\nREG          = [\"wiki\", \"web\", \"news\", \"qa\"]\nTARGET_LIST  = 60001              # length of the emitted priority list (>=12M tok)\n\ndef main():\n    tok = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(\"gpt2\")\n\n    # (1) per-register target n-gram counts from the four dev quarters\n    dev = np.load(DEV).astype(np.int64); N = len(dev)\n    reg_counts = []\n    for r in range(4):\n        seg = dev[r * N // 4:(r + 1) * N // 4]\n        c = np.zeros(D); np.add.at(c, ngram_hashes(tok.decode(seg)), 1.0)\n        reg_counts.append(c)\n\n    # (2) single streaming pass over the pool: token length, quality, features,\n    #     and accumulate the pool background n-gram counts.\n    ids, tlen, qual, feats = [], [], [], []\n    bg = np.zeros(D)\n    buf_ids, buf_txt = [], []\n    def flush():\n        enc = tok(buf_txt, add_special_tokens=False).input_ids\n        for i, txt, e in zip(buf_ids, buf_txt, enc):\n            h = ngram_hashes(txt); np.add.at(bg, h, 1.0)\n            ids.append(i); tlen.append(len(e)); qual.append(quality(txt)); feats.append(h)\n    with open(POOL) as f:\n        for line in f:\n            r = json.loads(line); buf_ids.append(r[\"id\"]); buf_txt.append(r[\"text\"])\n            if len(buf_ids) >= 2000:\n                flush(); buf_ids, buf_txt = [], []\n    if buf_ids:\n        flush()\n    ids = np.array(ids, dtype=np.int64); tlen = np.array(tlen, dtype=np.int64)\n\n    # (3) Naive-Bayes log-ratio weights per register vs background\n    a = 1.0; Nbg = bg.sum()\n    logw = [np.log((c + a) / (c.sum() + a * D)) - np.log((bg + a) / (Nbg + a * D))\n            for c in reg_counts]\n\n    # (4) per-doc register scores; register = argmax; spread = max - min\n    text = {int(i): t for i, t in zip(ids, buf_txt)} if False else None  # (freed)\n    S = np.full((len(ids), 4), -1e9, dtype=np.float64)\n    for i, h in enumerate(feats):\n        if len(h):\n            for r in range(4):\n                S[i, r] = logw[r][h].mean()\n    assign = S.argmax(1); best = S.max(1); spread = S.max(1) - S.min(1)\n\n    # need raw text again for dedup signatures\n    txt = {}\n    for line in open(POOL):\n        r = json.loads(line); txt[r[\"id\"]] = r[\"text\"]\n    def sig(t):\n        return hash(re.sub(r\"\\s+\", \" \", t.lower()).strip()[:160])\n\n    keep = np.zeros(len(ids), dtype=bool)\n    for i in range(len(ids)):\n        q = qual[i]\n        if q is not None and spread[i] >= SPREAD_MIN and passes_quality(tlen[i], q):\n            keep[i] = True\n\n    # (5) fill each register's token budget with its best-matching kept docs\n    seen = set(); perreg = [[] for _ in range(4)]\n    for r in range(4):\n        idx = np.where(keep & (assign == r))[0]\n        idx = idx[np.argsort(-S[idx, r])]\n        tot = 0\n        for k in idx:\n            i = int(ids[k]); sg = sig(txt[i])\n            if sg in seen:\n                continue\n            seen.add(sg); perreg[r].append(i); tot += int(tlen[k]) + 1\n            if tot >= CAPS_M[r] * 1e6:\n                break\n        print(f\"{REG[r]:5s} picked {len(perreg[r]):5d}  ~{tot/1e6:.2f}M tok\")\n\n    # (6) priority order: weighted round-robin (weights ~ register budgets)\n    w = [max(1, round(c)) for c in CAPS_M]      # -> [5,5,2,1]\n    sel, ptr = [], [0, 0, 0, 0]\n    while any(ptr[r] < len(perreg[r]) for r in range(4)):\n        for r in range(4):\n            for _ in range(w[r]):\n                if ptr[r] < len(perreg[r]):\n                    sel.append(perreg[r][ptr[r]]); ptr[r] += 1\n    # overflow: pad with best-overall kept docs so the list safely exceeds 12M tok\n    have = set(sel)\n    for k in np.argsort(-best):\n        if not keep[k]:\n            continue\n        i = int(ids[k])\n        if i in have:\n            continue\n        sel.append(i); have.add(i)\n        if len(sel) >= TARGET_LIST:\n            break\n\n    json.dump(sel, open(OUT, \"w\"))\n    covered = np.cumsum([len(tok(txt[i], add_special_tokens=False).input_ids) + 1\n                         for i in sel[:20000]])\n    n12 = int(np.searchsorted(covered, 12_000_000)) + 1\n    print(f\"wrote {OUT}: {len(sel)} ids; first ~{n12} cover the 12M-token budget\")\n\nif __name__ == \"__main__\":\n    main()\n", "structuredPatch": [], "originalFile": null, "userModified": false}

started 4419

[stdout]
started 4419
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

Token indices sequence length is longer than the specified maximum sequence length for this model (1048 > 1024). Running this sequence through the model will result in indexing errors
---
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 136279 Aug  4 04:41 /workspace/submission/selection.json

[stdout]
Token indices sequence length is longer than the specified maximum sequence length for this model (1048 > 1024). Running this sequence through the model will result in indexing errors
---
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 136279 Aug  4 04:41 /workspace/submission/selection.json
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

time:
2437

[stdout]
time:
2437
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

root       154  0.0  0.0  12432  5632 ?        Ss   04:23   0:00 bash -c  rm -f /tmp/ri-exec-8de99357d582417f81c5ee3eb59643ca.pid setsid bash -c 'set -o pipefail; export PATH="$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"; claude --verbose --output-format=stream-json --permission-mode=bypassPermissions --disallowedTools WebSearch WebFetch --print -- '"'"'# Task: Curate a raw web corpus to train the best small language model  ## Context You are assembling the pretraining data for a small language model. You have a large pool of **raw web documents** at `/workspace/data/pool.jsonl` ??? one JSON object per line: `{"id": <int>, "text": "..."}`. The documents are unlabeled. The pool holds **182,016 documents (~200M GPT-2 tokens total)**.  Compute is fixed: the model is trained on a **fixed budget of 12,000,000 tokens** ??? only ~6% of the pool, far smaller than the whole thing. So you cannot train on everything: you must decide *which* documents are worth training on. The training pipeline tokenizes your selection (GPT-2 BPE) in priority order and stops once it has accumulated 12M tokens.  ## Goal Curate the pool: choose the documents that, trained on under the fixed budget, produce the **best language model**. Quality is measured by **held-out perplexity on a BROAD, multi-domain high-quality English target** ??? equal parts encyclopedic (Wikipedia), general high-quality web prose, news, and technical Q&A. This is your disclosed target: select data that makes the model good across *all* of these registers, not just one. Lower perplexity is better.  ## Deliverables 1. `/workspace/submission/selection.json` ??? a JSON list of pool `id`s to train    on, in **priority order** (best first). The training pipeline consumes your    list in order until the **12M-token** budget is filled, then trains. Provide    enough ids to cover at least 12M tokens (a few hundred MB of text is ample);    ids beyond the budget are simply unused. 2. `/workspace/submission/curate.py` ??? the reproducible script that produced    your selection from a stated criterion (not a hand-picked id list). 3. `/workspace/claim.md` ??? Hypothesis / Mechanism (predict an observable other    than the final perplexity) / Falsification / Transfer.  ## Resources - The **frozen training script** is provided (`/workspace/train_nano.py`, with   `model.py`). It trains a ~30M-parameter GPT from scratch on a token budget with   fixed hyperparameters. **You may run it to evaluate a candidate selection**   against a dev target (`/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy`) ??? one run is ~60s on the   GPU ??? but you **cannot change it**; the official run uses an identical frozen   copy. The only thing you control is the data selection. - Standard GPU sandbox (Python, PyTorch, transformers). How you assess document   quality is entirely up to you (filters, classifiers, heuristics, a model, etc.). - Your session ends when the wall-clock budget runs out ??? check   `/workspace/.timer/remaining_secs` at any point for the authoritative time left   (don'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'t assume a fixed number of hours). Every training run you do comes out of   that budget. - No internet. The pool'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'s documents are freshly assembled; you cannot look up   any quality labels ??? any quality signal must come from your own analysis.  ## How you are scored Official: your selection fills the fixed token budget, the frozen script trains the 30M GPT from scratch, and the verifier measures the **absolute held-out perplexity on the hidden high-quality target** (a different sample from the disclosed domain than the dev set). That perplexity is your score. **Lower is better** ??? the goal is simply to push held-out perplexity as low as you can.  The verifier reports the raw perplexity and does no normalization. For reference and for a separate downstream normalization step, the benchmark records two fixed anchors: a **baseline** of held-out perplexity from a random selection (the do-nothing reference), and a **theoretical best** of perplexity 1 (the perplexity floor, unreachable in practice). Aim to get your held-out perplexity well below the random baseline.  ## Constraints - `selection.json` must be produced by `curate.py` from a stated criterion; an   opaque hand-picked id list fails the publishability check even if it scores well. - A selection with duplicate or out-of-range ids, or too few tokens to fill the   budget, is marked invalid (no score recorded) and excluded from ranking, so it   can'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'t win and doesn'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'t distort averages. '"'"' 2>&1 </dev/null | tee /logs/agent/claude-code.txt' & child="$!" echo "$child" > /tmp/ri-exec-8de99357d582417f81c5ee3eb59643ca.pid wait "$child" rc="$?" rm -f /tmp/ri-exec-8de99357d582417f81c5ee3eb59643ca.pid exit "$rc" 
root       156  0.0  0.0  12432  5376 ?        Ss   04:23   0:00 bash -c set -o pipefail; export PATH="$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"; claude --verbose --output-format=stream-json --permission-mode=bypassPermissions --disallowedTools WebSearch WebFetch --print -- '# Task: Curate a raw web corpus to train the best small language model  ## Context You are assembling the pretraining data for a small language model. You have a large pool of **raw web documents** at `/workspace/data/pool.jsonl` ??? one JSON object per line: `{"id": <int>, "text": "..."}`. The documents are unlabeled. The pool holds **182,016 documents (~200M GPT-2 tokens total)**.  Compute is fixed: the model is trained on a **fixed budget of 12,000,000 tokens** ??? only ~6% of the pool, far smaller than the whole thing. So you cannot train on everything: you must decide *which* documents are worth training on. The training pipeline tokenizes your selection (GPT-2 BPE) in priority order and stops once it has accumulated 12M tokens.  ## Goal Curate the pool: choose the documents that, trained on under the fixed budget, produce the **best language model**. Quality is measured by **held-out perplexity on a BROAD, multi-domain high-quality English target** ??? equal parts encyclopedic (Wikipedia), general high-quality web prose, news, and technical Q&A. This is your disclosed target: select data that makes the model good across *all* of these registers, not just one. Lower perplexity is better.  ## Deliverables 1. `/workspace/submission/selection.json` ??? a JSON list of pool `id`s to train    on, in **priority order** (best first). The training pipeline consumes your    list in order until the **12M-token** budget is filled, then trains. Provide    enough ids to cover at least 12M tokens (a few hundred MB of text is ample);    ids beyond the budget are simply unused. 2. `/workspace/submission/curate.py` ??? the reproducible script that produced    your selection from a stated criterion (not a hand-picked id list). 3. `/workspace/claim.md` ??? Hypothesis / Mechanism (predict an observable other    than the final perplexity) / Falsification / Transfer.  ## Resources - The **frozen training script** is provided (`/workspace/train_nano.py`, with   `model.py`). It trains a ~30M-parameter GPT from scratch on a token budget with   fixed hyperparameters. **You may run it to evaluate a candidate selection**   against a dev target (`/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy`) ??? one run is ~60s on the   GPU ??? but you **cannot change it**; the official run uses an identical frozen   copy. The only thing you control is the data selection. - Standard GPU sandbox (Python, PyTorch, transformers). How you assess document   quality is entirely up to you (filters, classifiers, heuristics, a model, etc.). - Your session ends when the wall-clock budget runs out ??? check   `/workspace/.timer/remaining_secs` at any point for the authoritative time left   (don'"'"'t assume a fixed number of hours). Every training run you do comes out of   that budget. - No internet. The pool'"'"'s documents are freshly assembled; you cannot look up   any quality labels ??? any quality signal must come from your own analysis.  ## How you are scored Official: your selection fills the fixed token budget, the frozen script trains the 30M GPT from scratch, and the verifier measures the **absolute held-out perplexity on the hidden high-quality target** (a different sample from the disclosed domain than the dev set). That perplexity is your score. **Lower is better** ??? the goal is simply to push held-out perplexity as low as you can.  The verifier reports the raw perplexity and does no normalization. For reference and for a separate downstream normalization step, the benchmark records two fixed anchors: a **baseline** of held-out perplexity from a random selection (the do-nothing reference), and a **theoretical best** of perplexity 1 (the perplexity floor, unreachable in practice). Aim to get your held-out perplexity well below the random baseline.  ## Constraints - `selection.json` must be produced by `curate.py` from a stated criterion; an   opaque hand-picked id list fails the publishability check even if it scores well. - A selection with duplicate or out-of-range ids, or too few tokens to fill the   budget, is marked invalid (no score recorded) and excluded from ranking, so it   can'"'"'t win and doesn'"'"'t distort averages. ' 2>&1 </dev/null | tee /logs/agent/claude-code.txt
root       157  5.3  0.0 6365960 549184 ?      Sl   04:23   2:38 claude --verbose --output-format=stream-json --permission-mode=bypassPermissions --disallowedTools WebSearch WebFetch --print -- # Task: Curate a raw web corpus to train the best small language model  ## Context You are assembling the pretraining data for a small language model. You have a large pool of **raw web documents** at `/workspace/data/pool.jsonl` ??? one JSON object per line: `{"id": <int>, "text": "..."}`. The documents are unlabeled. The pool holds **182,016 documents (~200M GPT-2 tokens total)**.  Compute is fixed: the model is trained on a **fixed budget of 12,000,000 tokens** ??? only ~6% of the pool, far smaller than the whole thing. So you cannot train on everything: you must decide *which* documents are worth training on. The training pipeline tokenizes your selection (GPT-2 BPE) in priority order and stops once it has accumulated 12M tokens.  ## Goal Curate the pool: choose the documents that, trained on under the fixed budget, produce the **best language model**. Quality is measured by **held-out perplexity on a BROAD, multi-domain high-quality English target** ??? equal parts encyclopedic (Wikipedia), general high-quality web prose, news, and technical Q&A. This is your disclosed target: select data that makes the model good across *all* of these registers, not just one. Lower perplexity is better.  ## Deliverables 1. `/workspace/submission/selection.json` ??? a JSON list of pool `id`s to train    on, in **priority order** (best first). The training pipeline consumes your    list in order until the **12M-token** budget is filled, then trains. Provide    enough ids to cover at least 12M tokens (a few hundred MB of text is ample);    ids beyond the budget are simply unused. 2. `/workspace/submission/curate.py` ??? the reproducible script that produced    your selection from a stated criterion (not a hand-picked id list). 3. `/workspace/claim.md` ??? Hypothesis / Mechanism (predict an observable other    than the final perplexity) / Falsification / Transfer.  ## Resources - The **frozen training script** is provided (`/workspace/train_nano.py`, with   `model.py`). It trains a ~30M-parameter GPT from scratch on a token budget with   fixed hyperparameters. **You may run it to evaluate a candidate selection**   against a dev target (`/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy`) ??? one run is ~60s on the   GPU ??? but you **cannot change it**; the official run uses an identical frozen   copy. The only thing you control is the data selection. - Standard GPU sandbox (Python, PyTorch, transformers). How you assess document   quality is entirely up to you (filters, classifiers, heuristics, a model, etc.). - Your session ends when the wall-clock budget runs out ??? check   `/workspace/.timer/remaining_secs` at any point for the authoritative time left   (don't assume a fixed number of hours). Every training run you do comes out of   that budget. - No internet. The pool's documents are freshly assembled; you cannot look up   any quality labels ??? any quality signal must come from your own analysis.  ## How you are scored Official: your selection fills the fixed token budget, the frozen script trains the 30M GPT from scratch, and the verifier measures the **absolute held-out perplexity on the hidden high-quality target** (a different sample from the disclosed domain than the dev set). That perplexity is your score. **Lower is better** ??? the goal is simply to push held-out perplexity as low as you can.  The verifier reports the raw perplexity and does no normalization. For reference and for a separate downstream normalization step, the benchmark records two fixed anchors: a **baseline** of held-out perplexity from a random selection (the do-nothing reference), and a **theoretical best** of perplexity 1 (the perplexity floor, unreachable in practice). Aim to get your held-out perplexity well below the random baseline.  ## Constraints - `selection.json` must be produced by `curate.py` from a stated criterion; an   opaque hand-picked id list fails the publishability check even if it scores well. - A selection with duplicate or out-of-range ids, or too few tokens to fill the   budget, is marked invalid (no score recorded) and excluded from ranking, so it   can't win and doesn't distort averages. 
root      4419 94.8  0.6 7638680 7022984 ?     Rl   05:04   7:30 python3 submission/curate.py
---log---
time:
2427

[stdout]
root       154  0.0  0.0  12432  5632 ?        Ss   04:23   0:00 bash -c  rm -f /tmp/ri-exec-8de99357d582417f81c5ee3eb59643ca.pid setsid bash -c 'set -o pipefail; export PATH="$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"; claude --verbose --output-format=stream-json --permission-mode=bypassPermissions --disallowedTools WebSearch WebFetch --print -- '"'"'# Task: Curate a raw web corpus to train the best small language model  ## Context You are assembling the pretraining data for a small language model. You have a large pool of **raw web documents** at `/workspace/data/pool.jsonl` ??? one JSON object per line: `{"id": <int>, "text": "..."}`. The documents are unlabeled. The pool holds **182,016 documents (~200M GPT-2 tokens total)**.  Compute is fixed: the model is trained on a **fixed budget of 12,000,000 tokens** ??? only ~6% of the pool, far smaller than the whole thing. So you cannot train on everything: you must decide *which* documents are worth training on. The training pipeline tokenizes your selection (GPT-2 BPE) in priority order and stops once it has accumulated 12M tokens.  ## Goal Curate the pool: choose the documents that, trained on under the fixed budget, produce the **best language model**. Quality is measured by **held-out perplexity on a BROAD, multi-domain high-quality English target** ??? equal parts encyclopedic (Wikipedia), general high-quality web prose, news, and technical Q&A. This is your disclosed target: select data that makes the model good across *all* of these registers, not just one. Lower perplexity is better.  ## Deliverables 1. `/workspace/submission/selection.json` ??? a JSON list of pool `id`s to train    on, in **priority order** (best first). The training pipeline consumes your    list in order until the **12M-token** budget is filled, then trains. Provide    enough ids to cover at least 12M tokens (a few hundred MB of text is ample);    ids beyond the budget are simply unused. 2. `/workspace/submission/curate.py` ??? the reproducible script that produced    your selection from a stated criterion (not a hand-picked id list). 3. `/workspace/claim.md` ??? Hypothesis / Mechanism (predict an observable other    than the final perplexity) / Falsification / Transfer.  ## Resources - The **frozen training script** is provided (`/workspace/train_nano.py`, with   `model.py`). It trains a ~30M-parameter GPT from scratch on a token budget with   fixed hyperparameters. **You may run it to evaluate a candidate selection**   against a dev target (`/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy`) ??? one run is ~60s on the   GPU ??? but you **cannot change it**; the official run uses an identical frozen   copy. The only thing you control is the data selection. - Standard GPU sandbox (Python, PyTorch, transformers). How you assess document   quality is entirely up to you (filters, classifiers, heuristics, a model, etc.). - Your session ends when the wall-clock budget runs out ??? check   `/workspace/.timer/remaining_secs` at any point for the authoritative time left   (don'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'t assume a fixed number of hours). Every training run you do comes out of   that budget. - No internet. The pool'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'s documents are freshly assembled; you cannot look up   any quality labels ??? any quality signal must come from your own analysis.  ## How you are scored Official: your selection fills the fixed token budget, the frozen script trains the 30M GPT from scratch, and the verifier measures the **absolute held-out perplexity on the hidden high-quality target** (a different sample from the disclosed domain than the dev set). That perplexity is your score. **Lower is better** ??? the goal is simply to push held-out perplexity as low as you can.  The verifier reports the raw perplexity and does no normalization. For reference and for a separate downstream normalization step, the benchmark records two fixed anchors: a **baseline** of held-out perplexity from a random selection (the do-nothing reference), and a **theoretical best** of perplexity 1 (the perplexity floor, unreachable in practice). Aim to get your held-out perplexity well below the random baseline.  ## Constraints - `selection.json` must be produced by `curate.py` from a stated criterion; an   opaque hand-picked id list fails the publishability check even if it scores well. - A selection with duplicate or out-of-range ids, or too few tokens to fill the   budget, is marked invalid (no score recorded) and excluded from ranking, so it   can'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'t win and doesn'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'t distort averages. '"'"' 2>&1 </dev/null | tee /logs/agent/claude-code.txt' & child="$!" echo "$child" > /tmp/ri-exec-8de99357d582417f81c5ee3eb59643ca.pid wait "$child" rc="$?" rm -f /tmp/ri-exec-8de99357d582417f81c5ee3eb59643ca.pid exit "$rc" 
root       156  0.0  0.0  12432  5376 ?        Ss   04:23   0:00 bash -c set -o pipefail; export PATH="$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"; claude --verbose --output-format=stream-json --permission-mode=bypassPermissions --disallowedTools WebSearch WebFetch --print -- '# Task: Curate a raw web corpus to train the best small language model  ## Context You are assembling the pretraining data for a small language model. You have a large pool of **raw web documents** at `/workspace/data/pool.jsonl` ??? one JSON object per line: `{"id": <int>, "text": "..."}`. The documents are unlabeled. The pool holds **182,016 documents (~200M GPT-2 tokens total)**.  Compute is fixed: the model is trained on a **fixed budget of 12,000,000 tokens** ??? only ~6% of the pool, far smaller than the whole thing. So you cannot train on everything: you must decide *which* documents are worth training on. The training pipeline tokenizes your selection (GPT-2 BPE) in priority order and stops once it has accumulated 12M tokens.  ## Goal Curate the pool: choose the documents that, trained on under the fixed budget, produce the **best language model**. Quality is measured by **held-out perplexity on a BROAD, multi-domain high-quality English target** ??? equal parts encyclopedic (Wikipedia), general high-quality web prose, news, and technical Q&A. This is your disclosed target: select data that makes the model good across *all* of these registers, not just one. Lower perplexity is better.  ## Deliverables 1. `/workspace/submission/selection.json` ??? a JSON list of pool `id`s to train    on, in **priority order** (best first). The training pipeline consumes your    list in order until the **12M-token** budget is filled, then trains. Provide    enough ids to cover at least 12M tokens (a few hundred MB of text is ample);    ids beyond the budget are simply unused. 2. `/workspace/submission/curate.py` ??? the reproducible script that produced    your selection from a stated criterion (not a hand-picked id list). 3. `/workspace/claim.md` ??? Hypothesis / Mechanism (predict an observable other    than the final perplexity) / Falsification / Transfer.  ## Resources - The **frozen training script** is provided (`/workspace/train_nano.py`, with   `model.py`). It trains a ~30M-parameter GPT from scratch on a token budget with   fixed hyperparameters. **You may run it to evaluate a candidate selection**   against a dev target (`/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy`) ??? one run is ~60s on the   GPU ??? but you **cannot change it**; the official run uses an identical frozen   copy. The only thing you control is the data selection. - Standard GPU sandbox (Python, PyTorch, transformers). How you assess document   quality is entirely up to you (filters, classifiers, heuristics, a model, etc.). - Your session ends when the wall-clock budget runs out ??? check   `/workspace/.timer/remaining_secs` at any point for the authoritative time left   (don'"'"'t assume a fixed number of hours). Every training run you do comes out of   that budget. - No internet. The pool'"'"'s documents are freshly assembled; you cannot look up   any quality labels ??? any quality signal must come from your own analysis.  ## How you are scored Official: your selection fills the fixed token budget, the frozen script trains the 30M GPT from scratch, and the verifier measures the **absolute held-out perplexity on the hidden high-quality target** (a different sample from the disclosed domain than the dev set). That perplexity is your score. **Lower is better** ??? the goal is simply to push held-out perplexity as low as you can.  The verifier reports the raw perplexity and does no normalization. For reference and for a separate downstream normalization step, the benchmark records two fixed anchors: a **baseline** of held-out perplexity from a random selection (the do-nothing reference), and a **theoretical best** of perplexity 1 (the perplexity floor, unreachable in practice). Aim to get your held-out perplexity well below the random baseline.  ## Constraints - `selection.json` must be produced by `curate.py` from a stated criterion; an   opaque hand-picked id list fails the publishability check even if it scores well. - A selection with duplicate or out-of-range ids, or too few tokens to fill the   budget, is marked invalid (no score recorded) and excluded from ranking, so it   can'"'"'t win and doesn'"'"'t distort averages. ' 2>&1 </dev/null | tee /logs/agent/claude-code.txt
root       157  5.3  0.0 6365960 549184 ?      Sl   04:23   2:38 claude --verbose --output-format=stream-json --permission-mode=bypassPermissions --disallowedTools WebSearch WebFetch --print -- # Task: Curate a raw web corpus to train the best small language model  ## Context You are assembling the pretraining data for a small language model. You have a large pool of **raw web documents** at `/workspace/data/pool.jsonl` ??? one JSON object per line: `{"id": <int>, "text": "..."}`. The documents are unlabeled. The pool holds **182,016 documents (~200M GPT-2 tokens total)**.  Compute is fixed: the model is trained on a **fixed budget of 12,000,000 tokens** ??? only ~6% of the pool, far smaller than the whole thing. So you cannot train on everything: you must decide *which* documents are worth training on. The training pipeline tokenizes your selection (GPT-2 BPE) in priority order and stops once it has accumulated 12M tokens.  ## Goal Curate the pool: choose the documents that, trained on under the fixed budget, produce the **best language model**. Quality is measured by **held-out perplexity on a BROAD, multi-domain high-quality English target** ??? equal parts encyclopedic (Wikipedia), general high-quality web prose, news, and technical Q&A. This is your disclosed target: select data that makes the model good across *all* of these registers, not just one. Lower perplexity is better.  ## Deliverables 1. `/workspace/submission/selection.json` ??? a JSON list of pool `id`s to train    on, in **priority order** (best first). The training pipeline consumes your    list in order until the **12M-token** budget is filled, then trains. Provide    enough ids to cover at least 12M tokens (a few hundred MB of text is ample);    ids beyond the budget are simply unused. 2. `/workspace/submission/curate.py` ??? the reproducible script that produced    your selection from a stated criterion (not a hand-picked id list). 3. `/workspace/claim.md` ??? Hypothesis / Mechanism (predict an observable other    than the final perplexity) / Falsification / Transfer.  ## Resources - The **frozen training script** is provided (`/workspace/train_nano.py`, with   `model.py`). It trains a ~30M-parameter GPT from scratch on a token budget with   fixed hyperparameters. **You may run it to evaluate a candidate selection**   against a dev target (`/workspace/data/multi_dev.npy`) ??? one run is ~60s on the   GPU ??? but you **cannot change it**; the official run uses an identical frozen   copy. The only thing you control is the data selection. - Standard GPU sandbox (Python, PyTorch, transformers). How you assess document   quality is entirely up to you (filters, classifiers, heuristics, a model, etc.). - Your session ends when the wall-clock budget runs out ??? check   `/workspace/.timer/remaining_secs` at any point for the authoritative time left   (don't assume a fixed number of hours). Every training run you do comes out of   that budget. - No internet. The pool's documents are freshly assembled; you cannot look up   any quality labels ??? any quality signal must come from your own analysis.  ## How you are scored Official: your selection fills the fixed token budget, the frozen script trains the 30M GPT from scratch, and the verifier measures the **absolute held-out perplexity on the hidden high-quality target** (a different sample from the disclosed domain than the dev set). That perplexity is your score. **Lower is better** ??? the goal is simply to push held-out perplexity as low as you can.  The verifier reports the raw perplexity and does no normalization. For reference and for a separate downstream normalization step, the benchmark records two fixed anchors: a **baseline** of held-out perplexity from a random selection (the do-nothing reference), and a **theoretical best** of perplexity 1 (the perplexity floor, unreachable in practice). Aim to get your held-out perplexity well below the random baseline.  ## Constraints - `selection.json` must be produced by `curate.py` from a stated criterion; an   opaque hand-picked id list fails the publishability check even if it scores well. - A selection with duplicate or out-of-range ids, or too few tokens to fill the   budget, is marked invalid (no score recorded) and excluded from ranking, so it   can't win and doesn't distort averages. 
root      4419 94.8  0.6 7638680 7022984 ?     Rl   05:04   7:30 python3 submission/curate.py
---log---
time:
2427
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

wiki  picked  8078  ~4.80M tok
web   picked  6269  ~4.70M tok
news  picked  3757  ~2.20M tok
qa    picked   615  ~0.40M tok
wrote /workspace/submission/selection.json: 60001 ids; first ~18548 cover the 12M-token budget
running:
3

[stdout]
wiki  picked  8078  ~4.80M tok
web   picked  6269  ~4.70M tok
news  picked  3757  ~2.20M tok
qa    picked   615  ~0.40M tok
wrote /workspace/submission/selection.json: 60001 ids; first ~18548 cover the 12M-token budget
running:
3
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

started official eval 5173

[stdout]
started official eval 5173
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

File created successfully at: /workspace/claim.md (file state is current in your context — no need to Read it back)

[metadata] {"type": "create", "filePath": "/workspace/claim.md", "content": "# Claim: register-matched, spread-filtered curation beats undifferentiated quality filtering\n\n## Hypothesis\nFor a fixed 12M-token budget and a **broad, equal-parts** target (Wikipedia /\nhigh-quality web prose / news / technical Q&A), the best selection is *not* the\ntop-N documents under a single global quality score. It is a selection that (a)\nremoves machine-spun word-salad that a vocabulary filter alone lets through, and\n(b) **allocates the budget per target register in proportion to how hard and how\ndata-scarce each register is**, rather than equally. Concretely: give the\nencyclopedic and web registers the largest budgets, news a moderate one, and take\n*all* the (scarce) Q&A. This will produce a lower held-out perplexity on the\nhidden same-domain target than either a random selection or a single-classifier\ntop-N selection.\n\n## Mechanism (prediction of an observable other than the final perplexity)\nThe selection criterion is a per-register Naive-Bayes log-likelihood ratio; the\nanti-spam test is the **spread** of a document's four register scores\n(`max − min`). Two mechanistic predictions, both checkable *without training*:\n\n1. **Spam has small spread; real prose has large spread.** Machine-spun\n   keyword-stuffing matches every register weakly and uniformly, so its four\n   scores are close together (spread ≈ 0.2–0.35). Genuine register-specific prose\n   scores high on its own register and *strongly negative* on the Q&A register\n   (code/markup), giving spread ≈ 1.0–1.6. Observed on hand-checked examples:\n   spun docs 0.22–0.36; real news/wiki 1.0–1.6. Dropping `spread < 0.38` removes\n   the spun docs from the top of every register's ranking.\n\n2. **Per-quarter perplexity is highly uneven, and it moves with per-register\n   token budget.** When we train and measure perplexity separately on each dev\n   quarter, the encyclopedic (Wikipedia) quarter is by far the hardest and the\n   most responsive to added data, while news saturates early. Observed: with an\n   *equal* 3M/register split, per-quarter PPL was wiki ≈ 688, qa ≈ 376,\n   web ≈ 268, news ≈ 258. Shifting budget toward wiki drove the wiki quarter\n   down to ≈ 595 and the full PPL from 366 → 337. Prediction: the ranking of\n   per-quarter difficulty (wiki ≫ qa > web ≳ news) is a property of pool-vs-target\n   mismatch and will reproduce on the hidden target.\n\n## Falsification\nThe claim is false if any of the following hold on the frozen pipeline:\n- A single global top-N quality selection (no per-register split, no spread test)\n  matches or beats the register-allocated selection. *Measured: it does not —\n  380.7 vs 336.8 dev PPL.*\n- Removing the Q&A quarter from the budget does **not** hurt (it should, sharply,\n  because Q&A is scarce and out-of-distribution for the rest). *Measured: dropping\n  Q&A raised full PPL 337 → 385 and the Q&A quarter 309 → 458.*\n- Equalizing the per-register budgets (3M each) is as good as the wiki/web-heavy\n  allocation. *Measured: equal split 366 vs allocated 337.*\n- The spread filter removes little or hurts: if spun docs did not concentrate at\n  low spread, raising `SPREAD_MIN` would not change the top of the rankings.\n\n## Transfer\nThe **method** transfers to any fixed-budget selection against a *disclosed,\nmulti-register* target: build one target-vs-background n-gram likelihood ratio per\nregister, assign each doc to its argmax register, reject low-spread (register-\nagnostic) spam, then size each register's budget to its difficulty × scarcity\ninstead of splitting equally. It does **not** rely on any label in the pool — only\non the target reference — so it applies to any new pool from the same crawl. It\nshould *not* transfer to a single-domain target (there the spread test loses its\nmeaning and a plain top-N quality filter suffices), nor to budgets large enough to\nconsume the whole clean pool (there curation cannot help because there is nothing\nleft to exclude). The concrete hyper-parameters (`SPREAD_MIN=0.38`,\n`CAPS=[4.9,4.7,2.2,0.4]M`) are tuned to *this* pool/target and would be re-fit\nfrom the per-quarter difficulty curve on a new one; the recipe for choosing them\nis what transfers.\n", "structuredPatch": [], "originalFile": null, "userModified": false}

Token indices sequence length is longer than the specified maximum sequence length for this model (1653 > 1024). Running this sequence through the model will result in indexing errors
packed 12000000 tokens from 60001 ids -> /tmp/dev_train.npy
time:
2217

[stdout]
Token indices sequence length is longer than the specified maximum sequence length for this model (1653 > 1024). Running this sequence through the model will result in indexing errors
packed 12000000 tokens from 60001 ids -> /tmp/dev_train.npy
time:
2217
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

HELDOUT_PPL 336.849  loss 5.8196  train_s 54  /tmp/dev_train.npy
(dev PPL on multi_dev; official uses a hidden disjoint sample of the same HQ domain)
time:
2137

[stdout]
HELDOUT_PPL 336.849  loss 5.8196  train_s 54  /tmp/dev_train.npy
(dev PPL on multi_dev; official uses a hidden disjoint sample of the same HQ domain)
time:
2137
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}

n ids: 60001
unique: 60001
all ints: True
id range: 1 182015 (pool size 182016 -> valid 0..182015)
INTEGRITY OK
--- files ---
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4182 Aug  4 05:15 claim.md

submission/:
total 427
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    100 Aug  4 05:04 .
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    180 Aug  4 05:15 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   8398 Aug  4 05:04 curate.py
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 427637 Aug  4 05:14 selection.json

[stdout]
n ids: 60001
unique: 60001
all ints: True
id range: 1 182015 (pool size 182016 -> valid 0..182015)
INTEGRITY OK
--- files ---
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4182 Aug  4 05:15 claim.md

submission/:
total 427
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    100 Aug  4 05:04 .
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    180 Aug  4 05:15 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   8398 Aug  4 05:04 curate.py
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 427637 Aug  4 05:14 selection.json
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}