"""ADR-0175 Phase 3b — bounded, deterministic multiplicative derivation search. The first attempt generator. Conservative by design: it proposes a single candidate — the **full product of all extracted quantities** — and only when a multiplicative-relation cue lexeme is present in the text. The proposal is then passed through the Phase 3a self-verification gate (grounding ∧ unit ∧ unique), so nothing ungrounded can resolve. The cue set is an explicit **provisional hypothesis**: it is the search's first guess at which lexemes license multiplication. It is *not* claimed correct — the sealed practice lane checks every attempt against gold, and wrong attempts become elimination records (§9) that refine the hypothesis over time. That refinement is the compounding loop; this module only stands up the first, gated attempt. wrong=0 posture: the search runs only in the sealed practice lane (never serving), every proposal is gated by self-verification, and a non-unique or ungrounded proposal refuses. Bounded by :data:`MAX_QUANTITIES` (refuse rather than enumerate an unbounded product). """ from __future__ import annotations import re from typing import Final from generate.derivation.extract import extract_quantities from generate.derivation.model import GroundedDerivation, Step from generate.derivation.verify import Resolution, select_self_verified from generate.math_roundtrip import _tokens # Provisional multiplicative-cue lexemes (the search's first hypothesis; refined # by practice elimination, not asserted correct). Sorted use for determinism. MULTIPLICATIVE_CUES: Final[tuple[str, ...]] = ("each", "every", "for", "per", "times") MAX_QUANTITIES: Final[int] = 6 _SENTENCE_SPLIT: Final[re.Pattern[str]] = re.compile(r"(?<=[.?!])\s+") def _sentence_candidates(problem_text: str) -> list[GroundedDerivation]: """One in-clause product candidate per sentence that has ≥2 quantities and a present multiplicative cue. Per-sentence (in-clause) scope is deliberate: it targets the multiplicative *aggregate* and avoids multiplying quantities that merely co-occur across sentences. When two sentences each yield a product, they disagree and the uniqueness gate refuses — so the disagreement rule does real safety work instead of being trivially satisfied by a single whole-text candidate. """ candidates: list[GroundedDerivation] = [] for sentence in _SENTENCE_SPLIT.split(problem_text): quantities = extract_quantities(sentence) if not 2 <= len(quantities) <= MAX_QUANTITIES: continue present = [c for c in MULTIPLICATIVE_CUES if c in _tokens(sentence)] if not present: continue cue = present[0] # deterministic (MULTIPLICATIVE_CUES is sorted-by-design) start, *rest = quantities candidates.append( GroundedDerivation( start=start, steps=tuple(Step(op="multiply", operand=q, cue=cue) for q in rest), ) ) return candidates def multiplicative_candidates(problem_text: str) -> list[GroundedDerivation]: """ADR-0182 — the ungated in-clause product candidates, for cross-composer pooling. Same construction :func:`search_multiplicative` gates, exposed so the pool can weigh products against the other composers' readings.""" return _sentence_candidates(problem_text) def search_multiplicative(problem_text: str) -> Resolution | None: """Attempt a grounded in-clause multiplicative product. Builds one product candidate per qualifying sentence and runs them through the Phase 3a gate: a single self-verifying candidate resolves; zero (no grounded product) or several that disagree refuse. Deterministic and bounded. """ return select_self_verified(_sentence_candidates(problem_text), problem_text)