(no commit message)

This commit is contained in:
2026-03-31 21:17:09 -07:00
parent ba9e3e8a38
commit 3c8908a969
3 changed files with 84 additions and 2 deletions

View File

@@ -1,2 +1,4 @@
# lead-qualifier-gepa
---
arbiter_probe: modaic/gpt-oss-120b-probe
is_arbiter: true
---

40
config.json Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
{
"model": null,
"signature": {
"$defs": {
"Reasoning": {
"type": "dspy.Reasoning"
}
},
"description": "Given the fields `company_name`, produce the fields `qualified`.",
"properties": {
"company_name": {
"__dspy_field_type": "input",
"desc": "${company_name}",
"prefix": "Company Name:",
"title": "Company Name",
"type": "string"
},
"reasoning": {
"$ref": "#/$defs/Reasoning",
"__dspy_field_type": "output",
"desc": "Your reasoning for your answer. Inlude any uncertainties about your answer or ambiguity in the task.",
"prefix": "Reasoning:"
},
"qualified": {
"__dspy_field_type": "output",
"desc": "${qualified}",
"prefix": "Qualified:",
"title": "Qualified",
"type": "boolean"
}
},
"required": [
"company_name",
"reasoning",
"qualified"
],
"title": "StringSignature",
"type": "object"
}
}

40
program.json Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
{
"traces": [],
"train": [],
"demos": [],
"signature": {
"instructions": "Task Instruction for the Assistant:\n\n1. Objective:\n - Given the field `company_name`, determine and produce the field `qualified`, which is a boolean value indicating whether the company is likely to meet unspecified qualification criteria.\n\n2. Input:\n - `company_name`: A string representing the name of a company.\n\n3. Output:\n - `reasoning`: A Python string literal explaining the rationale for determining the `qualified` status. Your reasoning should consider both the name itself and any inferred characteristics of the company, noting uncertainties as necessary.\n - `qualified`: A boolean (True/False) indicating if the company is likely to meet generic qualification criteria presumed for technology-related programs or corporate standards.\n \n4. Generalizable Strategy:\n - If the company name suggests it is engaged in technology, SaaS, or AI, default to assuming `qualified = True`. Justify this with reasoning that the name suggests alignment with typical industry qualifications.\n - If the company name suggests a small-scale, niche, or local business without clear tech alignment, lean towards `qualified = False`, stating gaps in alignment with typical qualification standards.\n - Note ambiguities and use reasoning for explaining your decision-making process clearly.\n\n5. Formatting:\n - Wrap the `reasoning` as a Python string with appropriate quotation marks to ensure it is clear and concise.\n - Provide the `qualified` output as a straightforward boolean value, True or False.\n - Enclose outputs in the specific format structure:\n \n ```\n [[ ## reasoning ## ]]\n \"<reasoning_string>\"\n\n [[ ## qualified ## ]]\n <True/False>\n\n [[ ## completed ## ]]\n ```\n \n6. Note:\n - Use your best judgment based on hints in the company name and maintain a consistent format for outputs.\n - Apply critical thinking to analyze the company name and infer logical assumptions about the company's nature or industry. Ensure each response is thoroughly considered and justified.",
"fields": [
{
"prefix": "Company Name:",
"description": "${company_name}"
},
{
"prefix": "Reasoning:",
"description": "Your reasoning for your answer. Inlude any uncertainties about your answer or ambiguity in the task."
},
{
"prefix": "Qualified:",
"description": "${qualified}"
}
]
},
"lm": {
"model": "together_ai/openai/gpt-oss-120b",
"model_type": "chat",
"cache": true,
"num_retries": 3,
"finetuning_model": null,
"launch_kwargs": {},
"train_kwargs": {},
"temperature": null,
"max_tokens": null
},
"metadata": {
"dependency_versions": {
"python": "3.11",
"dspy": "3.1.2",
"cloudpickle": "3.1"
}
}
}