docs/EVALUATION_PLAN.md

Evaluation Plan: North-Orthodox Language Model

Research Question

Does reasoning emerge from a corpus of Orthodox theological sources?

Evaluation Phases

Phase 1: Pre-training Evaluation (immediately after pre-training)

1.1 In-Domain Competence (Theology)

Purpose: Verify the model has absorbed its training corpus.

Test	Format	Source
Doctrinal QA	Open-ended	"What did Athanasius teach about the Son?"
Council knowledge	Multiple choice	"What did Nicaea I define about the Son?"
Patristic attribution	Open-ended	"Who wrote 'On the Incarnation'?"
Scripture recall	Open-ended	"Quote Romans 8:28-30"
Canon enumeration	Open-ended	"List all 20 canons of Nicaea I"

1.2 Argument Analysis (Reasoning from corpus)

Purpose: Test if model can extract and analyze argument structure.

Test	Format	Description
Premise extraction	Open-ended	"What are the premises in Athanasius's argument against Arius?"
Conclusion identification	Open-ended	"What is the conclusion of Gregory Naz's 5th Theological Oration?"
Fallacy detection	Multiple choice	Identify fallacies in a fabricated argument
Analogy recognition	Open-ended	"What analogy does Chrysostom use in Homily X?"

Phase 2: Reasoning Transfer (cross-domain)

Purpose: Test whether reasoning learned from theology transfers to other domains.

2.1 Arithmetic

Test	Format	Why
Basic arithmetic	Open-ended	"What is 47 × 23?"
Multi-step arithmetic	Open-ended	"If A=B, B=2C, C=5, what is A?"
Word problems	Open-ended	"John has 3 apples..."
Number comparison	Multiple choice	"Which is larger: 1/3 or 3/8?"

2.2 Formal Logic

Test	Format	Why
Syllogism validation	Multiple choice	"All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore..."
Modus ponens	Open-ended	Given premises, derive conclusion
Fallacy identification	Multiple choice	Identify logical errors
Propositional logic	Multiple choice	Truth table evaluation

2.3 Analogical Reasoning

Test	Format	Why
In-domain analogy	Open-ended	"How is theosis like healing?"
Cross-domain analogy	Open-ended	"How is a council like a family gathering?"
Pattern completion	Open-ended	"As fire is to heat, so water is to ___"

2.4 Planning & Sequencing

Test	Format	Why
Simple planning	Open-ended	"Plan a trip to Mount Athos for 3 days"
Step ordering	Multiple choice	Given steps, arrange in correct order
Resource allocation	Open-ended	"Distribute resources among X monasteries"

Phase 3: SFT Evaluation

Purpose: After supervised fine-tuning, test conversational ability.

Test	Format	Description
Instruction following	Open-ended	Follow multi-step instructions
Citation accuracy	Open-ended	"Quote John 3:16 and explain it"
Tone appropriateness	Rubric	Responses match theological register
Error rate	Metric	Factual errors per 100 words

Phase 4: GRPO Evaluation

Purpose: After reinforcement learning, test reasoning improvement.

Test	Format	Description
Logic chain quality	Rubric	Multi-step reasoning clarity
Self-correction	Open-ended	"Here's a flawed argument. Fix it."
Cross-domain transfer	Open-ended	Solve non-theological reasoning tasks
Consistency	Metric	Same question, different phrasing → same answer

Metrics

Primary Metrics

• Accuracy on in-domain QA (target: >70% correct on CRITICAL sources)
• Reasoning transfer score = average performance on cross-domain tasks
• Token efficiency = average tokens per coherent response

Secondary Metrics

• Citation accuracy = % of quotations that match source exactly
• Argument coherence = human-rated coherence of multi-step reasoning
• Hallucination rate = false claims per 100 words
• Coverage = % of corpus topics the model can discuss

Comparison Baseline

We'll compare against:

1. Random initialization (no pre-training) — baseline
2. Web-scraped model of similar size (LLaMA 130M) — general reasoning baseline
3. Our model — theology-specific reasoning

Evaluation Timing

Phase	When	Model
Pre-training eval	After each checkpoint	All
SFT eval	After SFT complete	SFT model
GRPO eval	After each GRPO epoch	GRPO model
Final eval	End of project	Final model

Success Criteria

Metric	Debug Model	Production Model
In-domain QA accuracy	>30%	>60%
Citation accuracy	>50%	>80%
Hallucination rate	<5/100 words	<2/100 words
Cross-domain reasoning	~random	>random
Conversational ability	Poor	Good (after SFT)