# REWARD_DESIGN.md — Bug Triage Reward & Grader Design --- ## Two Systems: Reward vs Grader | | Step Reward | Grader Score | |-|------------|-------------| | Purpose | GRPO training signal | Hackathon evaluation | | When | Every `step()` | Only at `done=True` | | Range | [-0.5, 1.0] (shaped) | [0.0, 1.0] (strict) | | Endpoint | Via observation `reward` | `/grader` endpoint | **Mapping:** `reward = (grader_score × 1.5) − 0.5` - Perfect score (1.0) → reward = +1.0 - Zero score (0.0) → reward = -0.5 - This shaping gives gradient signal even for bad predictions. --- ## Task 1 Reward: Bug Type Classification | Agent Output | Score | |-------------|-------| | Correct type | **+1.0** | | Wrong type | **0.0** | Simple exact match. 6 possible types, so random baseline ≈ 0.167. --- ## Task 2 Reward: Priority Assignment | Distance from Correct | Score | |-----------------------|-------| | Exact match | **1.00** | | Off by 1 level | **0.67** | | Off by 2 levels | **0.33** | | Off by 3 levels | **0.00** | **Why partial credit?** Priority has ordinal structure — predicting "high" when answer is "critical" is better than predicting "low". --- ## Task 3 Reward: Full Triage (Composite) | Component | Weight | Scoring | |-----------|--------|---------| | Bug type correct | **0.30** | 1.0 exact, 0.0 else | | Priority correct | **0.30** | Distance: 0→1.0, 1→0.67, 2→0.33, 3→0.0 | | Developer correct | **0.20** | Exact→1.0, right specialty→0.5, else→0.0 | | Action correct | **0.20** | Exact→1.0, adjacent→0.5, else→0.0 | ### Partial Credit Details **Developer assignment:** - Exact match to ground truth → 1.0 - Wrong person but has the right specialization for the bug type → 0.5 - No match → 0.0 **Action suggestion (adjacency map):** ``` fix_immediately schedule_sprint (0.5) schedule_sprint needs_more_info (0.5) wontfix duplicate (0.5) ``` ### Example Scoring ``` Ground truth: type=crash, priority=critical, dev=Alice, action=fix_immediately Agent output: type=crash, priority=high, dev=Bob, action=fix_immediately type: crash == crash → 1.0 × 0.30 = 0.30 priority: high vs critical → 0.67 × 0.30 = 0.20 dev: Bob vs Alice → Bob knows crash → 0.5 × 0.20 = 0.10 action: fix_immediately → 1.0 × 0.20 = 0.20 Total: 0.80 ``` --- ## Why This Reward Design Is Meaningful 1. **Non-trivial** — random agent scores ~0.20 on Task 3; a good model should score 0.7+ 2. **Decomposed** — each dimension provides independent learning signal 3. **Partial credit** — prevents plateau; agent improves incrementally 4. **Varies per bug** — different bugs have different answers, so grader scores vary (no fixed output) 5. **Production-relevant** — mirrors how humans evaluate triage quality --- ## Grader Code Locations | Task | Grader File | Method | |------|-------------|--------| | task_1 | `graders/task1_grader.py` | `grade(episode_log, ground_truth) → float` | | task_2 | `graders/task2_grader.py` | `grade(episode_log, ground_truth) → float` | | task_3 | `graders/task3_grader.py` | `grade(episode_log, ground_truth) → float` |