4a5d0f460d
Instrument-first (PR #76 ruling): before touching the parser, measure where the 61 compare-marked TUNE cases die. Funnel: 57/61 die pre-enumeration; of those, **45 at the injection layer** ('recognizer matched but produced no injection'), 8 'no admissible candidate for statement', 3 'expected exactly one question sentence'; 3 solve today. Finding: the leverage is INJECTION (45/61), not the candidate regexes (which fire on clean clauses but the real multi-clause sentences never reach them) nor segmentation writ large. Injection is an EMITTER, so the sanctioned fix is making it inject compare candidates the recognizer already matches — never loosening the round-trip gate. Fix order by measured mass: injection (45) -> statement-admissibility (8) -> question-sentence (3). Tune-only development; single measure run at the end with refusal-by-reason + delta.
2.3 KiB
compare_multiplicative Increment — Per-Layer Attrition Funnel (diagnostic artifact)
Status: DIAGNOSTIC — instrument-first, decides the fix order (PR #76 ruling)
Date: 2026-07-18
Scope: the 61 compare-multiplicative-marked cases in the tune split of official holdout_dev/v1
(measure split untouched). Signals are the reader's own: branches_enumerated, refusal_reason,
selected_graph, then the corridor compiler.
The funnel
Reader pipeline stages: recognizer-match → injection → enumeration → admissibility → graph → solve.
| Layer | Cases (of 61) |
|---|---|
| Died pre-enumeration | 57 |
| Enumerated | 4 |
| …enumerated but no graph | 1 |
| …graph has a compare op | 3 |
| Solved today | 3 |
Pre-enumeration refusal reasons (the 57):
| Reason | Cases |
|---|---|
| "recognizer matched but produced no injection" | 45 |
| "no admissible candidate for statement" | 8 |
| "expected exactly one question sentence" | 3 |
| "no admissible candidate for question" | 1 |
The finding
The leverage is the injection layer: 45 / 61. The recognizer already matches these compare statements (e.g. 0000: "Aria has twice as many … as Emily, who has twice the number … as Spencer"); the injection step then produces no candidate — the multi-clause / compare shapes don't inject. This is where the mass is — not the candidate regexes (they fire on clean clauses but the real sentences never reach them), and not segmentation writ large.
Consequence for the fix (emitter-fix, not gate-loosening)
Injection is an emitter (it produces candidates), not a validator — so making it inject compare candidates for statements the recognizer already matches is the sanctioned kind of change (fix emitters; never loosen the round-trip gate). The remaining piles are secondary and sequenced after: "no admissible candidate for statement" (8), the one-question-sentence constraint (3).
Fix order, by measured mass: injection (45) → statement-admissibility (8) → question-sentence (3).
Each fix is developed against tune only, to wrong=0 on tune; the measure split gets its single run
at the end. Refusal-by-reason on the measure split (frequency / nested / anaphora / temporal /
inverse-undeterminable) is reported with the delta as the fail-closed evidence + the practice-lane
curriculum.