Spaces:
Running
Running
File size: 10,712 Bytes
6b731f7 fe14b09 6b731f7 fe14b09 6b731f7 fe14b09 6b731f7 7502356 6b731f7 7502356 6b731f7 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 | """
Evaluator Module - The EVALUATE step of the Reasoning Loop.
Interprets tool results and decides:
- What did we learn from this action?
- Does this answer the user's question?
- Should we continue investigating or stop?
- What follow-up questions emerged?
The Evaluator transforms raw tool output into understanding.
Architecture:
Tool Result → Evaluator.evaluate() → EvaluationOutput
- interpretation: natural language explanation
- answered: did this answer the question?
- confidence: how confident are we?
- should_stop: should the loop stop?
- next_questions: what to investigate next
"""
import json
import re
from dataclasses import dataclass, field
from typing import Dict, Any, List, Optional, Callable
from .findings import Finding, FindingsAccumulator
@dataclass
class EvaluationOutput:
"""Output from one EVALUATE step."""
interpretation: str # What we learned from the tool result
answered: bool # Does this answer the user's question?
confidence: float # 0.0-1.0 confidence
should_stop: bool # Should the reasoning loop stop?
next_questions: List[str] # Follow-up questions to investigate
key_metric: Optional[str] = None # Most important metric extracted
EVALUATOR_SYSTEM_PROMPT = """You are a senior data scientist interpreting analysis results.
Your job:
1. Interpret what the tool result MEANS (not just what it shows)
2. Decide if this answers the user's original question
3. Identify follow-up questions worth investigating
4. Assign confidence level to your interpretation
Be concise but insightful. Focus on:
- Statistical significance (not just numbers)
- Business implications (not just patterns)
- Confounders and caveats
- What's surprising vs expected
IMPORTANT CONFIDENCE RULES:
- If the tool returned feature_scores, feature_importance, or correlation values, and the user asked about features/importance/correlations → this IS the answer. Set answered=true, confidence ≥ 0.7.
- If the tool returned actual ranked data (top features, sorted scores, correlation pairs), set confidence ≥ 0.6.
- Do NOT keep saying "not answered" when the tool literally returned the requested information.
- Only say answered=false when the result is genuinely unrelated to the question or contains NO useful data.
CRITICAL: Output ONLY valid JSON, no other text."""
EVALUATOR_USER_TEMPLATE = """**User's original question**: {question}
**Action taken**: {tool_name}({arguments})
**Tool result** (compressed):
{result_summary}
**What we knew before this step**:
{prior_findings}
Evaluate this result. Respond with ONLY this JSON:
{{
"interpretation": "1-3 sentences: What does this result MEAN for answering the question?",
"answered": true/false,
"confidence": 0.0-1.0,
"should_stop": true/false,
"next_questions": ["follow-up question 1", "follow-up question 2"],
"key_metric": "most important number or finding (optional)"
}}
Guidelines for should_stop:
- true: Question is fully answered OR we've gathered enough evidence OR no more useful actions
- false: Important aspects remain uninvestigated
Guidelines for answered:
- true: The result contains data that directly addresses the user's question (e.g., feature scores for "which features are important?", correlations for "what correlates with X?")
- false: Result is unrelated to the question or contains only metadata without actual answers
Guidelines for confidence:
- 0.0-0.3: Weak evidence, need more investigation
- 0.3-0.6: Moderate evidence, some aspects unclear
- 0.6-0.8: Strong evidence, minor questions remain (e.g., got feature importance scores but could add more context)
- 0.8-1.0: Very strong evidence, question well answered (e.g., got ranked feature list with scores AND correlations)"""
class Evaluator:
"""
The EVALUATE step of the Reasoning Loop.
Takes a tool result and interprets it in the context of
the user's question and prior findings.
Usage:
evaluator = Evaluator(llm_caller=orchestrator._llm_text_call)
evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(
question="Why are customers churning?",
tool_name="analyze_correlations",
arguments={"file_path": "data.csv", "target_col": "churn"},
result=tool_result,
findings=findings_accumulator
)
if evaluation.should_stop:
# Move to synthesis
...
else:
# Continue reasoning loop
...
"""
def __init__(self, llm_caller: Callable):
"""
Args:
llm_caller: Function (system_prompt, user_prompt, max_tokens) -> str
"""
self.llm_caller = llm_caller
def evaluate(
self,
question: str,
tool_name: str,
arguments: Dict[str, Any],
result: Dict[str, Any],
findings: FindingsAccumulator,
result_compressor: Optional[Callable] = None
) -> EvaluationOutput:
"""
Evaluate a tool result.
Args:
question: User's original question
tool_name: Name of the tool that was executed
arguments: Tool arguments used
result: Raw tool result dict
findings: Accumulated findings so far
result_compressor: Optional function to compress tool results
Returns:
EvaluationOutput with interpretation and next steps
"""
# Compress the result for LLM consumption
if result_compressor:
result_summary = json.dumps(result_compressor(tool_name, result), default=str)
else:
result_summary = self._default_compress(result)
# Truncate if too long
if len(result_summary) > 3000:
result_summary = result_summary[:3000] + "... [truncated]"
# Build argument string
args_str = json.dumps(arguments, default=str)
if len(args_str) > 500:
args_str = args_str[:500] + "..."
user_prompt = EVALUATOR_USER_TEMPLATE.format(
question=question,
tool_name=tool_name,
arguments=args_str,
result_summary=result_summary,
prior_findings=findings.get_context_for_reasoning(max_findings=3)
)
response_text = self.llm_caller(
system_prompt=EVALUATOR_SYSTEM_PROMPT,
user_prompt=user_prompt,
max_tokens=1024
)
return self._parse_response(response_text, result_summary)
def build_finding(
self,
iteration: int,
hypothesis: str,
tool_name: str,
arguments: Dict[str, Any],
result_summary: str,
evaluation: "EvaluationOutput",
success: bool = True,
error_message: str = ""
) -> Finding:
"""
Build a Finding from a completed iteration.
Convenience method that combines the action and evaluation
into a single Finding for the accumulator.
"""
return Finding(
iteration=iteration,
hypothesis=hypothesis,
action=tool_name,
arguments=arguments,
result_summary=result_summary[:1000], # Cap size
interpretation=evaluation.interpretation,
confidence=evaluation.confidence if success else 0.0,
answered_question=evaluation.answered if success else False,
next_questions=evaluation.next_questions,
success=success,
error_message=error_message
)
def _parse_response(self, response_text: str, result_summary: str) -> EvaluationOutput:
"""Parse LLM response into EvaluationOutput."""
try:
data = json.loads(response_text.strip())
except json.JSONDecodeError:
# Try to extract JSON
json_match = re.search(r'\{[^{}]*(?:\{[^{}]*\}[^{}]*)*\}', response_text, re.DOTALL)
if json_match:
try:
data = json.loads(json_match.group(0))
except json.JSONDecodeError:
return self._fallback_evaluation(response_text, result_summary)
else:
return self._fallback_evaluation(response_text, result_summary)
return EvaluationOutput(
interpretation=data.get("interpretation", "Result processed."),
answered=data.get("answered", False),
confidence=min(1.0, max(0.0, float(data.get("confidence", 0.3)))),
should_stop=data.get("should_stop", False),
next_questions=data.get("next_questions", []),
key_metric=data.get("key_metric")
)
def _fallback_evaluation(self, response_text: str, result_summary: str) -> EvaluationOutput:
"""Fallback when JSON parsing fails."""
# Use the raw response as interpretation
interpretation = response_text.strip()[:500] if response_text else "Analysis step completed."
return EvaluationOutput(
interpretation=interpretation,
answered=False,
confidence=0.3,
should_stop=False,
next_questions=[],
key_metric=None
)
def _default_compress(self, result: Dict[str, Any]) -> str:
"""Default compression for tool results."""
if not isinstance(result, dict):
return str(result)[:2000]
compressed = {}
# Always include status
if "success" in result:
compressed["success"] = result["success"]
if "error" in result:
compressed["error"] = str(result["error"])[:300]
# Include key result fields
result_data = result.get("result", result)
if isinstance(result_data, dict):
for key in ["num_rows", "num_columns", "missing_percentage", "task_type",
"best_model", "best_score", "models", "correlations",
"output_file", "output_path", "plots", "summary",
"total_issues", "columns_affected", "features_created",
"accuracy", "r2_score", "rmse", "f1_score"]:
if key in result_data:
value = result_data[key]
# Truncate long values
if isinstance(value, (list, dict)):
compressed[key] = str(value)[:500]
else:
compressed[key] = value
return json.dumps(compressed, default=str)
|