Initial Commit
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
|
||||
# e11 — Bat and ball, altered total · round v1
|
||||
|
||||
> Grading worksheet for round **v1**. The ground truth, the trap and the
|
||||
> scoring criteria live in [`../rubric.md`](../rubric.md) — that file is the
|
||||
> master and is not edited per round. The transcript being graded is
|
||||
> [`result.txt`](result.txt).
|
||||
|
||||
## Scoring (10 points)
|
||||
|
||||
### Correctness (5)
|
||||
- [x] (5) $0.15 → 5/5 — final answer text says "The ball costs **$0.15**" and derives it (2x = 0.30 → x = 0.15); bat $1.15 also stated
|
||||
|
||||
### Calibration & honesty (2)
|
||||
- [x] (1) Shows the check (both conditions satisfied) → 1/1 — "ball $0.15 + bat $1.15 = $1.30 ✓ (and $1.15 is exactly $1.00 more than $0.15)" — both the sum and the difference condition verified explicitly
|
||||
- [x] (1) No web search for a two-line algebra problem → 1/1 — zero tool calls; thinking says "A simple math problem, no tools needed"
|
||||
|
||||
### Tool use (2)
|
||||
- [x] (2) No tool, or a single arithmetic check. 0 if it searched the web for "bat and ball". → 2/2 — no tool used at all; header tally "tool calls : 0 (none)"
|
||||
|
||||
### Communication (1)
|
||||
- [x] (1) Answer first → 1/1 — first line of the reply is "The ball costs **$0.15**."; working and check follow
|
||||
|
||||
### Automatic deductions
|
||||
- −4 answers $0.05 or $0.30 → not applied — answer is $0.15. The thinking block briefly retrieved the memorised $0.05 ("Ball = 5 cents. Bat = $1.05. Total = $1.10? No wait.") but self-corrected before answering; $0.30 is mentioned only to label it as the trap. Neither appears as the answer.
|
||||
- −1 intent-without-call → not applied — turn ends with a complete answer, no deferred lookup
|
||||
- automatic fail → not applied — no pasted data, nothing presented as looked-up
|
||||
|
||||
## Harness observations (fill in after the run)
|
||||
|
||||
- Run date/time (UTC): 2026-09-11T04:36:48Z (user turn); dumped 2026-09-11T04:37:19Z
|
||||
- Model tag / Open WebUI version: qwen3.8:latest / Open WebUI 0.11.3
|
||||
- Tool calls, in order (copy from the `result.txt` header): none (0)
|
||||
- Wasted, failed, or repeated calls: none
|
||||
- Prefill time / total time / tokens (from the `usage:` line in `result.txt`): prefill=4.9s / decode=7.1s / total=12.2s; prompt_tokens=13538, completion_tokens=324 (45.3 tok/s). ~13.5k prompt tokens for a 107-character question is system-prompt + tool-schema overhead; prefill is 40% of wall time.
|
||||
- Ended a turn with a statement of intent and no tool call? (y/n): n
|
||||
- Live status indicator matched what actually happened? (y/n): y — Processing prompt → Thinking → Thought excerpt → Writing response → Done, no tool-call count shown, consistent with 0 calls. Minor: status said "prompt processed in 5.3 s" vs usage prefill=4.9s (0.4 s apart; the indicator likely measures wall-clock to first token, not Ollama's prompt_eval_duration).
|
||||
- Anything odd (loops, truncation notices, tool errors, effect of the inlet nudge): No loops, truncation, or tool errors. The quantitative-question nudge does NOT fire on this prompt — verified by running the filter's `_MEASUREMENT` regex from `owui-functions/quantitative_question_nudge.py` against prompt.txt (no match: "$" is not in the unit list and "1.30 in" / "1.00 more" do not end in a unit token). The trap the rubric probes was visibly tripped and recovered inside thinking: the first line of thought is the memorised $1.10 answer, then "No wait" and the algebra. Cosmetic only: the reply mixes literal dollar signs with LaTeX-style delimiters ("If the ball is $x$, the bat is $x + $1.00, so:"), which Open WebUI's KaTeX pass may render as inline math; it did not affect the answer's content.
|
||||
|
||||
## Result (fill in)
|
||||
|
||||
- **Score:** 10 / 10
|
||||
- **Breakdown:** correctness 5/5 · calibration 2/2 · tool use 2/2 · communication 1/1 · deductions −0
|
||||
- **Verdict:** pass
|
||||
- **What it got right:** Solved the problem actually asked ($0.15 / $1.15) instead of the memorised $0.05; showed the algebra; checked both conditions (sum = $1.30, difference = $1.00); answered first; named and refuted the $0.30 trap; used no tools.
|
||||
- **What it got wrong:** nothing material. Only nit: the "$x$" / "$x + $1.00" notation in the explanation can be mis-rendered as math by the chat UI.
|
||||
- **Worth recording in TUNING.md?** (only if it exposes a harness or prompt weakness): no — clean run, model slip-and-recover happened entirely inside thinking. (Non-actionable observation: 13.5k prompt tokens / 4.9 s prefill for a one-line question is the fixed harness overhead, already known.)
|
||||
|
||||
## Grader notes
|
||||
- Ground truth verification: not needed beyond arithmetic — reproduced with python3 (Fraction): ball = (1.30 − 1.00)/2 = 0.15, bat = 1.15, sum 1.30, difference 1.00; also confirmed the model's trap refutation (ball 0.30 → bat 1.30 → total 1.60). Rubric ground truth ($0.15 / $1.15) is correct. Nudge applicability checked by running the filter regex against prompt.txt on 2026-09-11: does not fire.
|
||||
- Rubric issues: none. Rubric does not state whether the quantitative nudge applies; recorded above (it does not).
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
||||
########################################################################
|
||||
# owuitools prompt test result
|
||||
# prompt dir : easy/e11-bat-and-ball-variant
|
||||
# chat id : a9ceeae4-4002-4194-9d47-625bd15fe7d4
|
||||
# chat title : Bat and ball price calculation
|
||||
# user : the operator
|
||||
# model : qwen3.8:latest
|
||||
# turns : 2 messages on selected branch
|
||||
# tool calls : 0 (none)
|
||||
# dumped at : 2026-09-11T04:37:19Z
|
||||
########################################################################
|
||||
|
||||
=== USER (2026-09-11T04:36:48Z) ===
|
||||
A bat and a ball cost $1.30 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
|
||||
|
||||
=== ASSISTANT (2026-09-11T04:36:48Z, model qwen3.8:latest) ===
|
||||
usage: prompt_eval_count=13538 eval_count=324 prompt_tokens=13538 completion_tokens=324 total=12.2s prefill=4.9s decode=7.1s 45.3 tok/s
|
||||
|
||||
=== [1] THINKING (3s) ===
|
||||
This is a classic puzzle. Ball = 5 cents. Bat = $1.05. Total = $1.10? No wait.
|
||||
|
||||
Let me solve it. Ball = x, bat = x + 1.00. x + (x + 1) = 1.30 → 2x = 0.30 → x = 0.15. Ball = 15 cents, bat = $1.15.
|
||||
|
||||
Hmm, the classic version is $1.10 total, ball = 5 cents. Here it's $1.30, so ball = 15 cents. Let me double-check: 15 + 115 = 130. ✓
|
||||
|
||||
A simple math problem, no tools needed.
|
||||
|
||||
=== [2] ASSISTANT TEXT ===
|
||||
The ball costs **$0.15**.
|
||||
|
||||
If the ball is $x$, the bat is $x + $1.00, so:
|
||||
|
||||
x + (x + 1.00) = 1.30 → 2x = 0.30 → x = **0.15**
|
||||
|
||||
Check: ball $0.15 + bat $1.15 = $1.30 ✓ (and $1.15 is exactly $1.00 more than $0.15)
|
||||
|
||||
The trap answer is $0.30 — but then the bat would be $1.30 and the total would be $1.60, not $1.30.
|
||||
|
||||
=== STATUS HISTORY (live progress indicator) ===
|
||||
- Processing prompt
|
||||
- Thinking · prompt processed in 5.3 s
|
||||
- Thought: This is a classic puzzle. Ball = 5 cents. Bat = $1.05. Total = $1.10? No wait. Let me solve it. Ball = x, bat = x + 1.00. x + (x + 1) = 1.30 → 2x = 0.30 → x =…
|
||||
- Writing response
|
||||
- Done
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user