Commit History
-
Wave 21: deep-read critical review — 8 source clusters re-read, findings verified
Baladithya Balamurugan +1: Claude Fable 58 Sonnet readers re-fetched every primary source (Composer 2.5 blog verbatim, Composer 2 techreport 2603.24477 full HTML, SWE-smith/SWE-Gym/R2E-Gym/SWE-bench, SDPO/OPSD, GRPO family + Comedy-of-Estimators, DiLoCo line, world-model cluster + anti-evidence, LATS/ToT/rStar/Tree-GRPO/SWE-Search/Symphony/Socratic-SWE, TRL/verl/SkyRL live docs, SWE-MiniSandbox) and cross-checked the repo's research notes + vision docs against them. 2 adversarial critics (fidelity, design); every P0/P1 finding independently verified against code + source quotes — 0 refuted. (Feasibility critic stalled on capacity; flagged unreviewed.) Top verified findings: - SDPO "mathematically the same" claim is WRONG (Cursor cites it as background; ours is a third, blog-inspired design) — to be corrected. - Envisioned tree pipeline had 4 structural breaks: seed-trace/oracle disjointness, NO rollout harness (SFT corpus had no producer), divergence gate uncomputable (whitespace-stub normalizer), no Sandbox.fork(). - …2a16b30