Look up any arxiv paper on alphaxiv.org to get a structured AI-generated overview. This is faster and more reliable than trying to read a raw PDF.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Review one terminal experiment and choose the next step: merge a reproducible winner, close a useful negative or dead end, or request missing evidence.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
설치 방법 보기설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.
Use get_prs for the complete discussion and the current base and head SHAs.
For code review, call get_pr_source with number, expected_base_sha, and
expected_head_sha. Its first response lists changed paths. Call it again with
up to eight selected paths, then read the returned artifact. It contains
complete text diffs and source at the comparison merge base and head. This also
works for merged PRs and private repositories; no shell credential is needed.
Pass the artifact to a review subagent when appropriate. If either PR SHA
changes, refresh the discussion and source before deciding. This read tool does
not authorize merging an operator PR through a student-assignment workflow.
Retrieve the complete PR with get_prs. Verify its assignment, current head
SHA, terminal structured result, W&B evidence, metric direction, and scientific
conclusion. Then choose the appropriate next step:
{
"assignment": {
"pr_number": 123,
"assignment_id": "assignment-id",
"revision_id": "current-revision-id",
"expected_pr_head_sha": "CURRENT_PR_HEAD_SHA"
},
"expected_current_base_sha": "CURRENT_BASE_SHA",
"merge_method": "squash"
}
Call merge_experiment. It immediately returns a delegated task ID. Continue
other work while the worker reviews and merges this exact PR with fresh
context from the PR discussion and target program. It uses the configured smart
model and reasoning effort for a fresh
code quality review. Unnecessary code, unrelated docs, and other scope problems
block merging; docs, tests, and complexity justified by the task remain valid.
The worker posts blocking findings to the current PR and sends you its outcome
through a completion event. Use agent_status or cancel_agents with the task
ID when needed. Do not treat a queued task as a completed merge.
The worker refuses drafts, missing or foreign results, stale heads, blocking
labels, unknown mergeability, and conflicts. It rechecks the PR and evidence
after review, and compares the live base SHA immediately before merging. If the
research base changed, reassess the exact terminal result against the event's
current_base_sha.
If the conclusion still holds, record that decision before merging:
{
"assignment": {
"pr_number": 123,
"assignment_id": "assignment-id",
"revision_id": "current-revision-id",
"expected_pr_head_sha": "CURRENT_PR_HEAD_SHA"
},
"expected_current_base_sha": "CURRENT_BASE_SHA",
"reason": "Why this exact result remains valid against the current research base."
}
Call accept_result_on_current_base with that payload. Its durable acceptance
is bound to the assignment, revision, result head, canonical structured result,
and exact current base SHA. If any of them changes, reassess. If the conclusion
no longer holds, request a new revision instead. Never invent a SHA or call
gh pr merge.
{
"assignment": {
"pr_number": 123,
"assignment_id": "assignment-id",
"revision_id": "current-revision-id",
"expected_pr_head_sha": "CURRENT_PR_HEAD_SHA"
},
"reason": "Concise scientific reason for closing this experiment."
}
Call close_experiment. Distinguish a useful negative from an invalid or
incomplete run. Do not edit labels, write protocol markers, or close the PR with
gh.
{
"assignment": {
"pr_number": 123,
"assignment_id": "assignment-id",
"revision_id": "current-revision-id",
"expected_pr_head_sha": "CURRENT_PR_HEAD_SHA"
},
"new_revision_id": "new-revision-id",
"required_base_sha": "ASSIGNED_OR_LIVE_BASE_SHA",
"comment": "Exact missing evidence and the bounded next run required."
}
Call request_assignment_revision. Use a new stable revision ID and the exact
research base SHA the next revision must use. State one concrete change or
experiment and its acceptance evidence; do not close an experiment that can
still answer the assigned question with one bounded correction.
Pass the assignment's recorded base_sha when the revision must preserve the
tested source, including after the advisor publishes research notes. Select the
exact live base SHA only when the student must incorporate that base before
running. Other SHAs are rejected. Prose cannot override the recorded base:
every submitted result must contain that exact commit. A result on the retained
base still needs accept_result_on_current_base before merging onto a changed
live base.
Update the baseline or research log in the format prescribed by program.md, including the PR, metrics, run IDs and links, reproduction command, and conclusion. Commit that advisor-owned change and publish it only through:
{
"remote_branch_sha_before_push": "REMOTE_SHA_BEFORE_PUSH",
"local_commit_sha": "LOCAL_COMMIT_SHA"
}
Call publish_advisor_branch; it publishes only the configured advisor branch.
Review multiple candidates strongest-first and refresh the baseline between each decision.
아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.
로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.
아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.
Look up any arxiv paper on alphaxiv.org to get a structured AI-generated overview. This is faster and more reliable than trying to read a raw PDF.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Operator-side analysis of historical ML experiment PRs in Senpai research tracks. Use this skill whenever the user asks to: analyze experiments, categorize PRs, bucket experiments, summarize what's been tried, understand experiment history, review merged vs closed results, or asks "what experiments have we run / worked / failed". Also triggers for: "pull the latest experiments", "what's been tried so far", "category breakdown of PRs", "which experiments succeeded", "noam track analysis". When a branch name is mentioned (e.g. "noam branch", "on the noam branch"), pass it as the base branch to scope the fetch to just those PRs.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Create a typed assignment branch and draft PR for one student. Use when the advisor has a concrete hypothesis and the student has no open `status:wip` or `status:review` assignment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Create or improve a Senpai target repository's program.md. Use this skill whenever the user wants to point Senpai at a fresh ML or research target repository, define the research objective, primary metric, benchmark contract, allowed edit boundaries, W&B reporting contract, or prepare a repo for autonomous advisor/student experiment loops.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Open GitHub Issues for human input and respond to the researcher team. Use this skill whenever you need to handle a human_issue event, respond to human issues, ask humans a question, or check team communications. Also triggers for: "any human messages?", "check issues", "respond to humans".
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.
Choose, configure, launch, and collect bounded subagents for research and engineering decisions. Root agents and delegation-capable subagents should read this before delegating: every task requires an explicit model tier, and high-leverage work such as research ideation, round planning, plateau pivots, large research reviews, hard optimization, disputed evidence, and expensive experiment portfolios requires frontier judgment.
한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.