feat(benchmark): add deterministic conformance harness #40
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
nsaspy/prolog-rlm!40
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "feature/issue-18-benchmark-conformance"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Summary
swipl -q -s benchmark/run.pl -- deterministicrlmentrypoint and include them inrlm_ready/0swipl -q -s benchmark/run.pl -- integration, using the production OpenRouter provider path and reporting real latency, token usage, provider-reported cost, selected model/HTTP evidence, provider health, and instruction quality1.0; usable output that misses the token scores0.5and remains visible as quality evidence instead of makingopenrouter/freerouting a flaky health gateDeterministic comparison
The direct/depth-0, RLM depth-1, and RLM depth-2 cases execute the same ground task with the same
remaining_calls=4andremaining_tokens=8000budget. Depth 2 is admitted only with the productionallow_deep_recursion(true)+deep_recursion_capability(true)gates. Deterministic call/token/cost numbers are fixed conformance fixtures, not claims about provider economics.Validation
Deterministic CI passes production/static load, the complete PlUnit suite, the standalone 16-case deterministic benchmark CLI, fresh-process graph restart, durable artifact restart, and whitespace checks. The PR live job exercises the existing REAL OpenRouter core/structured-repair gates plus the machine-readable integration benchmark. A first live run exposed a healthy HTTP/usage/assistant-output response that missed the requested token under
openrouter/free; the benchmark contract now records that distinction explicitly rather than conflating instruction quality with provider health.Closes #18