Skip to content
nano-gpt-data-curation

claude-opus-5

nano-gpt-data-curation — graded by the task's verifier against a measured baseline.

backend
modal
variant
claude claude-opus-5
metric
held-out multi-domain perplexity
actions
67
duration
59m
recorded
2026-08-04

run iddclm-nano-curation__edCjgpD

Everything claude-opus-5 did on this task, in order.

download JSON ↗
claude-codeclaude-opus-566 turns21 narration67 action67 observation45 reasoning1 final
#51
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "sleep 235; grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bsuxwsrce.output"
}
Bash result · error
Exit code 143
Command timed out after 2m 0s

[error] tool reported failure
#52
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "sleep 195; grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bsuxwsrce.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result · error
Exit code 143
Command timed out after 2m 0s

[error] tool reported failure
#53
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bsuxwsrce.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result
L HELDOUT_PPL 313.922  loss 5.7491  train_s 173  /tmp/trL.npy
J HELDOUT_PPL 316.182  loss 5.7563  train_s 175  /tmp/trJ.npy
K HELDOUT_PPL 324.631  loss 5.7827  train_s 175  /tmp/trK.npy
[1]   Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
[3]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
[2]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
2737

[stdout]
L HELDOUT_PPL 313.922  loss 5.7491  train_s 173  /tmp/trL.npy
J HELDOUT_PPL 316.182  loss 5.7563  train_s 175  /tmp/trJ.npy
K HELDOUT_PPL 324.631  loss 5.7827  train_s 175  /tmp/trK.npy
[1]   Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
[3]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
[2]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
2737
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}
#54
narration

More qa keeps helping (313.9 at 60%). I need to find where that turns around — and check whether qa-only beats stratification, which would change the claim:

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "python3 /tmp/build.py '[{\"sh\":{\"wiki\":0.0,\"qa\":1.0,\"web\":0.0},\"out\":\"/tmp/selM.json\"},\n {\"sh\":{\"wiki\":0.15,\"qa\":0.70,\"web\":0.15},\"out\":\"/tmp/selN.json\"},\n {\"sh\":{\"wiki\":0.25,\"qa\":0.55,\"web\":0.20},\"out\":\"/tmp/selO.json\"}]'\ncd /workspace; export TOKENIZERS_PARALLELISM=false\nfor v in M N O; do\n ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy >/dev/null 2>&1 && \\\n   python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed \"s/^/$v /\" ) &\ndone; wait",
  "run_in_background": true
}
Bash result
Command running in background with ID: bceav76ye. Output is being written to: /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bceav76ye.output. You will be notified when it completes. To check interim output, use Read on that file path.
Session cwd remains /workspace; directory changes made by the backgrounded command do not apply to subsequent commands.

[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false, "backgroundTaskId": "bceav76ye", "backgroundCwdHint": "Session cwd remains /workspace; directory changes made by the backgrounded command do not apply to subsequent commands."}
#55
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "sleep 235; grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bceav76ye.output"
}
Bash result · error
Exit code 143
Command timed out after 2m 0s

[error] tool reported failure
#56
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "sleep 190; grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bceav76ye.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result · error
Exit code 143
Command timed out after 2m 0s

[error] tool reported failure
#57
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bceav76ye.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result
O HELDOUT_PPL 316.955  loss 5.7588  train_s 174  /tmp/trO.npy
M HELDOUT_PPL 341.178  loss 5.8324  train_s 174  /tmp/trM.npy
[1]   Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
[3]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
N HELDOUT_PPL 317.308  loss 5.7599  train_s 174  /tmp/trN.npy
[2]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
2477

[stdout]
O HELDOUT_PPL 316.955  loss 5.7588  train_s 174  /tmp/trO.npy
M HELDOUT_PPL 341.178  loss 5.8324  train_s 174  /tmp/trM.npy
[1]   Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
[3]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
N HELDOUT_PPL 317.308  loss 5.7599  train_s 174  /tmp/trN.npy
[2]+  Done                    ( python3 pack_selection.py /tmp/sel$v.json /tmp/tr$v.npy > /dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/tr$v.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/$v.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT | sed "s/^/$v /" )
2477
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}
#58
narration

qa-only is worse (341) — interior optimum in both directions. Best is 20/60/20 at 313.9. Finalizing with those shares, and testing dilution on top in parallel:

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "cd /workspace\npython3 - <<'PY'\np='submission/curate.py'; s=open(p).read()\ns=s.replace('SHARES = {\"wiki\": 0.34, \"qa\": 0.33, \"web\": 0.33}   # tuned by dev sweep',\n'''# Quota shares, tuned by a dev sweep (see RESULTS.md). NOTE these are *selection*\n# shares, not the target's own mixture: the `qa` direction of the classifier picks\n# long-form expository/technical prose, which transfers to all target registers,\n# so its optimal share exceeds its share of the target. Both extremes are much\n# worse (qa=0.0 -> 443.4; qa=1.0 -> 341.2), so coverage still binds.\nSHARES = {\"wiki\": 0.20, \"qa\": 0.60, \"web\": 0.20}''')\nopen(p,'w').write(s)\nPY\ngrep -n \"SHARES =\" submission/curate.py\npython3 submission/curate.py 2>&1 | tail -6\npython3 -c \"\nimport json; a=json.load(open('/workspace/submission/selection.json')); b=json.load(open('/tmp/selL.json'))\nprint('docs',len(a),'identical to swept variant L:',a==b)\nprint('valid:',len(set(a))==len(a), min(a)>=0, max(a)<182016)\"",
  "run_in_background": true
}
Bash result
Command running in background with ID: behxeugcn. Output is being written to: /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/behxeugcn.output. You will be notified when it completes. To check interim output, use Read on that file path.
Session cwd remains /workspace; directory changes made by the backgrounded command do not apply to subsequent commands.

[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false, "backgroundTaskId": "behxeugcn", "backgroundCwdHint": "Session cwd remains /workspace; directory changes made by the backgrounded command do not apply to subsequent commands."}
#59
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "python3 /tmp/build.py '[{\"sh\":{\"wiki\":0.20,\"qa\":0.60,\"web\":0.20},\"out\":\"/tmp/selP.json\",\"dilute\":0.15}]'\ncd /workspace; export TOKENIZERS_PARALLELISM=false\npython3 pack_selection.py /tmp/selP.json /tmp/trP.npy >/dev/null 2>&1 && python3 train_nano.py --train_npy /tmp/trP.npy --heldout_npy data/multi_dev.npy --out_json /tmp/P.json 2>&1 | grep HELDOUT",
  "run_in_background": true
}
Bash result
Command running in background with ID: b4s8rj0m6. Output is being written to: /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/b4s8rj0m6.output. You will be notified when it completes. To check interim output, use Read on that file path.
Session cwd remains /workspace; directory changes made by the backgrounded command do not apply to subsequent commands.

[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false, "backgroundTaskId": "b4s8rj0m6", "backgroundCwdHint": "Session cwd remains /workspace; directory changes made by the backgrounded command do not apply to subsequent commands."}
#60
narration

Writing up results while those run:

toolWrite
args
{
  "file_path": "/workspace/RESULTS.md",
  "content": "# Dev sweep results\n\nFrozen `train_nano.py` (30M GPT, 3000 iters, seed 1337), 12M-token budget,\nheld-out = `data/multi_dev.npy`. Lower is better. All variants share the same\nhard quality gate and the same register classifier; only the selection rule\ndiffers. Register shares are **character** shares of the ordered list.\n\n| run | selection rule | wiki | qa | web | dev PPL |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| base | random pool sample (do-nothing) | — | — | — | 459.8 |\n| v1 | gate + single quality-vs-pool ranking | — | — | — | 434.4 |\n| I | stratified, **qa quota removed** | .50 | .00 | .50 | 443.4 |\n| M | stratified, **qa only** | .00 | 1.0 | .00 | 341.2 |\n| C | stratified | .15 | .15 | .70 | 332.7 |\n| A | stratified | .40 | .10 | .50 | 327.1 |\n| E | + dedup, length prior 0.45 | .34 | .33 | .33 | 325.2 |\n| K | + dedup + 15% dilution | .45 | .30 | .25 | 324.6 |\n| D | + dedup, length prior 0.15 | .34 | .33 | .33 | 324.1 |\n| v2 | stratified, length prior 0.15 | .25 | .25 | .50 | 321.4 |\n| B | stratified, length prior 0.15 | .34 | .33 | .33 | 320.3 |\n| F | + dedup, no length prior | .34 | .33 | .33 | 318.8 |\n| N | + dedup | .15 | .70 | .15 | 317.3 |\n| O | + dedup | .25 | .55 | .20 | 317.0 |\n| J | + dedup | .30 | .45 | .25 | 316.2 |\n| H | + dedup | .45 | .30 | .25 | 315.8 |\n| G | + dedup + 15% dilution | .34 | .33 | .33 | 315.3 |\n| **L** | **+ dedup (submitted)** | **.20** | **.60** | **.20** | **313.9** |\n\n## What the sweep shows\n\n1. **Cleanliness alone buys little.** Gate + a single quality-vs-pool ranking\n   (v1) gets 434.4, only 5.5% under the random baseline.\n\n2. **Stratification is the big lever.** Changing *only* the fill rule from one\n   global ranking to per-register quotas — same gate, same features, same\n   document scores — takes 434.4 → 321.4 (−26%). This is the central claim.\n\n3. **The quota vector has a clear interior optimum.** Both degenerate corners\n   collapse: dropping the qa quota gives 443.4 (worse than v1, essentially back\n   to baseline), and going qa-only gives 341.2. In between there is a broad flat\n   basin (≈314–318) for qa shares of 0.30–0.70. This falsifies the alternative\n   \"just concentrate on the single best-scoring register\" story.\n\n4. **Optimal *selection* shares ≠ target shares.** The best point puts 60% of the\n   budget on the `qa` direction, far above the ~25% that Q&A occupies in the\n   target. Inspection of what that direction selects explains it: the pool has\n   almost no HTML Q&A (96 documents with a `<p>` tag), so the classifier's qa\n   direction instead picks long-form expository/technical prose, which is useful\n   for *every* target register. Coverage still binds — hence the collapse at both\n   corners — but the mapping from target mixture to selection mixture is skewed by\n   which proxies the pool can actually supply.\n\n5. **Near-duplicate removal helps slightly and cheaply** (6,984 of 93,891 gated\n   documents flagged by MinHash over word 5-grams). At a 12M budget the model\n   already makes ~2 passes over the selection, so a near-dup pair is effectively\n   4 passes over that text.\n\n6. **The length prior was a mistake.** Ranking purely by register posterior beats\n   tilting toward longer documents: prior weight 0.0 → 318.8, 0.15 → 324.1,\n   0.45 → 325.2. It is set to 0 in the submitted script.\n\n7. **Diluting with random gated documents is roughly neutral** (G 315.3 vs F 318.8\n   suggested a small gain at 34/33/33; K 324.6 vs H 315.8 suggested a loss at\n   45/30/25). Inconsistent in sign, so it is not used in the submission.\n\n## Caveats\n\nDifferences below ~4 PPL are within the run-to-run spread I can resolve here, so\nthe ranking inside the 314–318 basin should not be read as significant; the\nsubmitted point is the best measured one inside that basin, and the basin is\nwide, which is the reassuring part. The gate thresholds themselves were set a\npriori from inspection of the pool and were not swept.\n"
}
Write result
File created successfully at: /workspace/RESULTS.md (file state is current in your context — no need to Read it back)

[metadata] {"type": "create", "filePath": "/workspace/RESULTS.md", "content": "# Dev sweep results\n\nFrozen `train_nano.py` (30M GPT, 3000 iters, seed 1337), 12M-token budget,\nheld-out = `data/multi_dev.npy`. Lower is better. All variants share the same\nhard quality gate and the same register classifier; only the selection rule\ndiffers. Register shares are **character** shares of the ordered list.\n\n| run | selection rule | wiki | qa | web | dev PPL |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| base | random pool sample (do-nothing) | — | — | — | 459.8 |\n| v1 | gate + single quality-vs-pool ranking | — | — | — | 434.4 |\n| I | stratified, **qa quota removed** | .50 | .00 | .50 | 443.4 |\n| M | stratified, **qa only** | .00 | 1.0 | .00 | 341.2 |\n| C | stratified | .15 | .15 | .70 | 332.7 |\n| A | stratified | .40 | .10 | .50 | 327.1 |\n| E | + dedup, length prior 0.45 | .34 | .33 | .33 | 325.2 |\n| K | + dedup + 15% dilution | .45 | .30 | .25 | 324.6 |\n| D | + dedup, length prior 0.15 | .34 | .33 | .33 | 324.1 |\n| v2 | stratified, length prior 0.15 | .25 | .25 | .50 | 321.4 |\n| B | stratified, length prior 0.15 | .34 | .33 | .33 | 320.3 |\n| F | + dedup, no length prior | .34 | .33 | .33 | 318.8 |\n| N | + dedup | .15 | .70 | .15 | 317.3 |\n| O | + dedup | .25 | .55 | .20 | 317.0 |\n| J | + dedup | .30 | .45 | .25 | 316.2 |\n| H | + dedup | .45 | .30 | .25 | 315.8 |\n| G | + dedup + 15% dilution | .34 | .33 | .33 | 315.3 |\n| **L** | **+ dedup (submitted)** | **.20** | **.60** | **.20** | **313.9** |\n\n## What the sweep shows\n\n1. **Cleanliness alone buys little.** Gate + a single quality-vs-pool ranking\n   (v1) gets 434.4, only 5.5% under the random baseline.\n\n2. **Stratification is the big lever.** Changing *only* the fill rule from one\n   global ranking to per-register quotas — same gate, same features, same\n   document scores — takes 434.4 → 321.4 (−26%). This is the central claim.\n\n3. **The quota vector has a clear interior optimum.** Both degenerate corners\n   collapse: dropping the qa quota gives 443.4 (worse than v1, essentially back\n   to baseline), and going qa-only gives 341.2. In between there is a broad flat\n   basin (≈314–318) for qa shares of 0.30–0.70. This falsifies the alternative\n   \"just concentrate on the single best-scoring register\" story.\n\n4. **Optimal *selection* shares ≠ target shares.** The best point puts 60% of the\n   budget on the `qa` direction, far above the ~25% that Q&A occupies in the\n   target. Inspection of what that direction selects explains it: the pool has\n   almost no HTML Q&A (96 documents with a `<p>` tag), so the classifier's qa\n   direction instead picks long-form expository/technical prose, which is useful\n   for *every* target register. Coverage still binds — hence the collapse at both\n   corners — but the mapping from target mixture to selection mixture is skewed by\n   which proxies the pool can actually supply.\n\n5. **Near-duplicate removal helps slightly and cheaply** (6,984 of 93,891 gated\n   documents flagged by MinHash over word 5-grams). At a 12M budget the model\n   already makes ~2 passes over the selection, so a near-dup pair is effectively\n   4 passes over that text.\n\n6. **The length prior was a mistake.** Ranking purely by register posterior beats\n   tilting toward longer documents: prior weight 0.0 → 318.8, 0.15 → 324.1,\n   0.45 → 325.2. It is set to 0 in the submitted script.\n\n7. **Diluting with random gated documents is roughly neutral** (G 315.3 vs F 318.8\n   suggested a small gain at 34/33/33; K 324.6 vs H 315.8 suggested a loss at\n   45/30/25). Inconsistent in sign, so it is not used in the submission.\n\n## Caveats\n\nDifferences below ~4 PPL are within the run-to-run spread I can resolve here, so\nthe ranking inside the 314–318 basin should not be read as significant; the\nsubmitted point is the best measured one inside that basin, and the basin is\nwide, which is the reassuring part. The gate thresholds themselves were set a\npriori from inspection of the pool and were not swept.\n", "structuredPatch": [], "originalFile": null, "userModified": false}
#61
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "sleep 180; echo \"== curate:\"; tail -6 /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/behxeugcn.output; echo \"== P:\"; grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/b4s8rj0m6.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result · error
Exit code 143
Command timed out after 2m 0s

[error] tool reported failure
#62
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "echo \"== curate:\"; tail -7 /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/behxeugcn.output; echo \"== P (dilute):\"; grep HELD /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/b4s8rj0m6.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result
== curate:
qa: mean logP of its top 5000 = -4.686
web: mean logP of its top 5000 = -0.291
chars per register: {'wiki': 20.0, 'qa': 60.0, 'web': 20.0}
selected 23170 docs, 100.0M chars (~23.8M tokens)
wrote /workspace/submission/selection.json
docs 23170 identical to swept variant L: True
valid: True True True
== P (dilute):
HELDOUT_PPL 323.879  loss 5.7804  train_s 53  /tmp/trP.npy
2277

[stdout]
== curate:
qa: mean logP of its top 5000 = -4.686
web: mean logP of its top 5000 = -0.291
chars per register: {'wiki': 20.0, 'qa': 60.0, 'web': 20.0}
selected 23170 docs, 100.0M chars (~23.8M tokens)
wrote /workspace/submission/selection.json
docs 23170 identical to swept variant L: True
valid: True True True
== P (dilute):
HELDOUT_PPL 323.879  loss 5.7804  train_s 53  /tmp/trP.npy
2277
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}
#63
narration

Dilution hurts at these shares (323.9) — correctly excluded. curate.py reproduces the best variant exactly. Running a final confirmation on the actual submission file:

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "bash dev_eval.sh /workspace/submission/selection.json 2>&1 | grep -E \"HELDOUT|packed\"",
  "run_in_background": true
}
Bash result
Command running in background with ID: bz1sv9hla. Output is being written to: /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bz1sv9hla.output. You will be notified when it completes. To check interim output, use Read on that file path.

[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false, "backgroundTaskId": "bz1sv9hla"}
#64
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "python3 - <<'PY'\nimport re\ns=open('RESULTS.md').read()\ns=s.replace('''7. **Diluting with random gated documents is roughly neutral** (G 315.3 vs F 318.8\n   suggested a small gain at 34/33/33; K 324.6 vs H 315.8 suggested a loss at\n   45/30/25). Inconsistent in sign, so it is not used in the submission.''',\n'''7. **Diluting with random gated documents does not help.** It looked marginally\n   positive at 34/33/33 (G 315.3 vs F 318.8) but was negative at 45/30/25\n   (K 324.6 vs H 315.8) and clearly negative at the submitted shares\n   (P 323.9 vs L 313.9). Not used in the submission.''')\ns=s.replace('| **L** | **+ dedup (submitted)** | **.20** | **.60** | **.20** | **313.9** |',\n '| P | + dedup + 15% dilution | .20 | .60 | .20 | 323.9 |\\n| **L** | **+ dedup (submitted)** | **.20** | **.60** | **.20** | **313.9** |')\nopen('RESULTS.md','w').write(s)\n\nc=open('claim.md').read()\nc=c.replace('''- **F3.** Removing the `qa` quota entirely (share → 0) is neutral or better at\n  matched budget. That would falsify M5 and show the quota is filling with noise\n  rather than a usable register proxy.''',\n'''- **F3.** Removing the `qa` quota entirely (share → 0) is neutral or better at\n  matched budget. That would falsify M5 and show the quota is filling with noise\n  rather than a usable register proxy. (Run: qa=0 gives 443.4 vs 313.9 at the\n  submitted shares — the sharpest confirmation in the sweep, and notable because\n  the pool contains no markup-matched Q&A at all.)''')\nc=c.replace('''| gate + register-stratified quotas 25/25/50 (v2) | **321.4** |''',\n'''| gate + register-stratified quotas 25/25/50 (v2) | 321.4 |\n| + near-dup removal, no length prior, quotas 20/60/20 (submitted) | **313.9** |\n| stratified but with the qa quota removed (F3 probe) | 443.4 |\n| stratified but qa-only (F2 probe) | 341.2 |''')\nc=c.replace('''- **M4 — Interior optimum in the quota vector.**''','''- **M4 — Interior optimum in the quota vector.**''')\nc=c.replace('''  perplexity should be a *concave* function of the quota shares with a minimum\n  near the target's true proportions: both starving a register and over-serving it\n  (spending budget on weak proxies at the expense of the abundant, well-matched\n  register) should be worse than matching. A pure quality story predicts monotone\n  improvement as we concentrate on the highest-scoring register instead.''',\n'''  perplexity should be a *concave* function of the quota shares with an interior\n  minimum: both starving a register and over-serving it should be worse than a\n  balanced fill. A pure quality story predicts monotone improvement as we\n  concentrate on the single highest-scoring register instead.\n  *Observed:* qa share 0.0 → 443.4, 0.30 → 315.8, 0.60 → 313.9, 1.0 → 341.2 — a\n  wide interior basin, both corners far worse. But the minimum sits at a qa share\n  of ~0.6, well **above** that register's ~25% share of the target, so the refined\n  claim is that the optimum matches the target mixture only up to how well the\n  pool can proxy each register (see M5); it is not a literal proportion match.''')\nopen('claim.md','w').write(c)\nprint(\"ok\")\nPY"
}
Bash result
ok

[stdout]
ok
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}
#65
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "sleep 200; cat /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bz1sv9hla.output; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result · error
Exit code 143
Command timed out after 2m 0s

[error] tool reported failure
#66
reasoning (redacted)

encrypted chain-of-thought — recorded, not exposed

toolBash
args
{
  "command": "cat /tmp/claude-0/-workspace/9df847d0-e162-4016-8bd5-af03c1e3e23f/tasks/bz1sv9hla.output; ls -la /workspace/submission /workspace/claim.md; cat /workspace/.timer/remaining_secs"
}
Bash result
packed 12000000 tokens from 23170 ids -> /tmp/dev_train.npy
HELDOUT_PPL 313.922  loss 5.7491  train_s 53  /tmp/dev_train.npy
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7273 Aug  4 02:02 /workspace/claim.md

/workspace/submission:
total 172
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    120 Aug  4 01:26 .
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    220 Aug  4 01:59 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  12520 Aug  4 01:59 curate.py
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 162503 Aug  4 02:00 selection.json
2126

[stdout]
packed 12000000 tokens from 23170 ids -> /tmp/dev_train.npy
HELDOUT_PPL 313.922  loss 5.7491  train_s 53  /tmp/dev_train.npy
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7273 Aug  4 02:02 /workspace/claim.md

/workspace/submission:
total 172
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    120 Aug  4 01:26 .
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root    220 Aug  4 01:59 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  12520 Aug  4 01:59 curate.py
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 162503 Aug  4 02:00 selection.json
2126
[metadata] {"noOutputExpected": false}
final summary

All deliverables are in place and verified end-to-end.

Result

Dev perplexity 313.9 vs the random-selection baseline of 459.8 — a 32% reduction, confirmed by a final run on the exact submitted selection.json (packs to precisely 12,000,000 tokens from 23,170 ids; ids unique and in range).

What worked

I decoded data/multi_dev.npy to recover the target text, split it on EOS, and labeled each target document by surface form into three registers — wiki (de-tokenized encyclopedic prose), qa (HTML technical Q&A), web (general prose + news). A 4-way softmax over hashed word uni+bigrams was fit on those three classes plus a random pool sample as a fourth "generic pool" class, giving every pool document a per-register posterior. Selection is a round-robin fill against per-register quotas, over a hard quality gate (length, alphabetic density, stopword mass, duplicate-line spam, non-English) plus MinHash near-duplicate removal.

The decisive finding: stratification, not cleanliness, is the lever. Gate + a single quality-vs-pool ranking got only 434.4. Changing only the fill rule to per-register quotas — same gate, same features, same document scores — took that to 321.4.

Two things worth flagging

  • The optimal selection mixture is not the target mixture. The best point spends 60% of the budget on the qa direction, far above Q&A's ~25% of the target. The reason is visible in the data: the pool has just 96 documents with a <p> tag, so that classifier direction can't match markup and instead selects long-form expository prose, which helps every register. I've stated this refinement explicitly rather than letting the tidier "match the proportions" story stand.
  • The 314–318 basin is flat, wider than the run-to-run spread I can resolve, so the ordering within it isn't significant. What is significant is that both corners collapse — dropping the qa quota gives 443.4 (essentially back to baseline), qa-only gives 341.2. I've noted this caveat in both write-ups.

Two swept ideas were negative and are excluded: a length prior (0.0 → 318.8 vs 0.45 → 325.2) and diluting with random gated documents (323.9 vs 313.9 at the submitted shares).

Files: submission/selection.json, submission/curate.py (reproduces the selection bit-identically from the stated criterion), claim.md, and RESULTS.md with the full 18-variant sweep.