Prompt explore #108
Open
Prompt explore #108
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
## Rubric Updates (v2.1) Updated rubric10.txt and rubric20.txt to address 23 stakeholder review comments: - Add W3C PROV-O provenance support with graph-based validation - Align with Bridge2AI AI/ML readiness criteria and bioRXiv article - Add data sustainability indicators (DOI, governance, repositories) - Support graph-based metadata representations (preprocessing, collection) - Correct license terminology (replace misleading "Open"/"Public" terms) - Clarify multimodal definitions for Bridge2AI datasets - Expand sensitive data examples (voice, activity, retinal images) - Add dataset merging/integration capability assessment - Make citation mandatory for all Bridge2AI datasets - Add hosting platform identification field - Document review comments and responses in REVIEW_COMMENTS_RESPONSE_REPORT.md ## D4D Evaluations Regenerated deterministic evaluations for all 4 Bridge2AI projects using claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929 (temperature=0.0): **Corrected Rubric10 Rankings (50 points max):** 1. AI_READI: 44/50 (88.0%) - Grade A- 2. VOICE: 40/50 (80.0%) - Grade B+ 3. CHORUS: 38/50 (76.0%) - Grade B 4. CM4AI: 36/50 (72.0%) - Grade C+ **Corrected Rubric20 Rankings (84 points max):** 1. CHORUS: 78/84 (92.9%) - Grade A 2. CM4AI: 68/84 (81.0%) - Grade B+ 3. AI_READI: 44/84 (52.4%) - Grade D **Score Validation:** - Fixed LLM math errors in 3 files (CM4AI: -8 points, VOICE: -6 points, CM4AI rubric20: +1 point) - Post-processing validation essential even at temperature=0.0 **Files Updated:** - Evaluation JSONs (rubric10 and rubric20 for all projects) - HTML renderings (8 files: 4 rubric10 + 4 rubric20) - EVALUATION_SUMMARY_2026-01-12.md - Comprehensive analysis - COMPARISON_TABLES_2026-01-12.md - Cross-rubric comparison tables **Key Findings:** - Universal strengths: Scientific Motivation (5/5) and Technical Transparency (5/5) across all projects - Universal weakness: Limitations Disclosure (avg 2.3/5) - all projects missing known_limitations, known_biases, anomalies - Schema compliance: 25% of evaluation files pass current schema validation (5/20 files) - Rank reversal: CHORUS ranks 3rd in Rubric10 but 1st in Rubric20 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Updated render_evaluation_html_rubric10_semantic.py to generate files with
consistent naming convention matching rubric20 files.
**Changes:**
- Modified script to generate `{PROJECT}_evaluation_rubric10.html` instead of `{PROJECT}_evaluation.html`
- Removed old HTML files without suffix
- Regenerated all 4 rubric10 evaluation HTML files with correct naming
**File naming convention (now consistent):**
- Rubric10: `{PROJECT}_evaluation_rubric10.html`
- Rubric20: `{PROJECT}_evaluation_rubric20.html`
- D4D Human-Readable: `{PROJECT}_d4d_human_readable.html`
**Files affected:**
- scripts/render_evaluation_html_rubric10_semantic.py (line 642)
- AI_READI_evaluation_rubric10.html (renamed from AI_READI_evaluation.html)
- CHORUS_evaluation_rubric10.html (renamed from CHORUS_evaluation.html)
- CM4AI_evaluation_rubric10.html (renamed from CM4AI_evaluation.html)
- VOICE_evaluation_rubric10.html (renamed from VOICE_evaluation.html)
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This pull request updates the D4D rubric evaluation system from version 2.0 to 2.1, incorporating comprehensive review comments and regenerating evaluations for Bridge2AI datasets. The changes include rubric enhancements (W3C PROV-O provenance, AI/ML readiness criteria, sustainability indicators), updated evaluation outputs, and extensive documentation of the review process and results.
Changes:
- Updated rubrics (v2.0 → v2.1) with 23 review comments addressed across rubric10.txt and rubric20.txt
- Regenerated evaluation JSONs for CM4AI and VOICE with updated scoring methodology
- Added comprehensive documentation (REVIEW_COMMENTS_RESPONSE_REPORT.md, EVALUATION_SUMMARY, COMPARISON_TABLES)
- Updated HTML rendering script to include "_rubric10" suffix in output filenames
- Refreshed HTML evaluation reports with new timestamps
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 21 out of 22 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| scripts/render_evaluation_html_rubric10_semantic.py | Updated output filename pattern to include "_rubric10" suffix |
| data/rubric/rubric20.txt | Schema v2.1 update with expanded field guide, revised questions (Q3, Q4, Q6, Q8-Q20) |
| data/rubric/rubric10.txt | Schema v2.1 update with expanded field guide, revised elements (3, 8, 10) |
| data/rubric/REVIEW_COMMENTS_RESPONSE_REPORT.md | New comprehensive 307-line documentation of 23 review comments |
| data/evaluation_llm/.../CM4AI_claudecode_agent_evaluation.json (rubric20) | Version 2.1 re-evaluation with score changes (82→68 points) |
| data/evaluation_llm/.../VOICE_claudecode_agent_evaluation.json (rubric10) | Version 2.1 re-evaluation with score changes (44→40 points) |
| data/evaluation_llm/.../CM4AI_claudecode_agent_evaluation.json (rubric10) | Version 2.1 re-evaluation with score changes (48→36 points) |
| data/evaluation_llm/EVALUATION_SUMMARY_2026-01-12.md | New 414-line summary report of evaluation results |
| data/evaluation_llm/COMPARISON_TABLES_2026-01-12.md | New 335-line comparative analysis tables |
| data/d4d_html/.../VOICE_evaluation_rubric10.html | New HTML rendering (1131 lines) |
| data/d4d_html/.../_evaluation.html | Timestamp updates (2025 dates → 2026-01-12/13) |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 21 out of 22 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
| # Generate output filename | ||
| project_name = eval_file.stem.replace('_claudecode_agent_evaluation', '') | ||
| output_path = output_dir / f"{project_name}_evaluation.html" | ||
| output_path = output_dir / f"{project_name}_evaluation_rubric10.html" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The output filename pattern has been changed from {project_name}_evaluation.html to {project_name}_evaluation_rubric10.html. This change should be documented and any dependent scripts or documentation should be updated to reflect this new naming convention.
Clean up old evaluation HTML files that were replaced with properly named versions containing the _rubric10 suffix. Files removed: - AI_READI_evaluation.html → AI_READI_evaluation_rubric10.html - CHORUS_evaluation.html → CHORUS_evaluation_rubric10.html - CM4AI_evaluation.html → CM4AI_evaluation_rubric10.html - VOICE_evaluation.html → VOICE_evaluation_rubric10.html All projects now use consistent naming with explicit rubric type suffixes. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.