跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

checkpoint-promotion

Evaluate whether a fine-tuned model is ready for release by checking training data, general capability loss, comparisons with the base model, and staged production rollout. Produces an evidence-based promotion or rejection report with one prioritized remedy when rejected.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Gate fine-tuned checkpoints with drift budgets, paired comparison, and forgetting checks before promotion. Use after a training run produces a checkpoint, when deciding whether a tuned model ships, or when a promoted model needs re-gating against updated goldens.

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Deciding whether to release a fine-tuned model
  • Checking whether training reduced general capabilities
  • Reassessing a model against updated reference evaluations
  • Documenting rejection evidence and the next remedy

包含的文件(2)

  • SKILL.md7.9 KB
  • references/gate-templates.md12.9 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Checkpoint Promotion

The Phase 5 gate for the whole plugin: a checkpoint that trains cleanly and beats its task metric still doesn't ship without clearing all four stages below. eval-harness-first built the suite re-run here — this skill is where that suite's baseline decides something.

Input: a trained checkpoint, eval/baseline-<model>.json from eval-harness-first, and the frozen eval/drift-suite.yaml. Output format: promotion-report.md — the four-stage evidence plus a terminal PROMOTE or REJECT verdict that /finetune Phase 5 and /promote-checkpoint consume directly.

The Four-Stage Gate

Each stage gates the next — a failure at stage 2 means stage 3 doesn't run. Stages 2 and 3 share one expensive inference pass, so running them concurrently and applying gate order at verdict time is licensed on a deterministic arena (nothing saved by serializing); a judge-based arena should still wait for stage 2 first — that's where the real savings are.

  1. Data-quality gate. Before any eval touches the checkpoint: dedup the training set, check for eval-goldens leakage (the exact failure trace-to-training-data's Hygiene section exists to prevent), and scan for label noise. A checkpoint trained on leaked goldens invalidates every later stage.
  2. Held-out + frozen capability-drift suite. Re-run eval-harness-first's eval/drift-suite.yaml — MMLU/GSM8K/IFEval plus 200–500 domain-adjacent items — against the checkpoint and diff against baseline-<model>.json per benchmark against the Drift Budget table below.
  3. Paired arena vs. base. Position-randomized judge, checkpoint vs. base model, same prompts — or the deterministic paired-comparison variant in references/gate-templates.md when every grader in the harness is deterministic (no LLM-judge; position randomization N/A there). A holdout win that loses the live arena does not ship — stage-2 numbers and stage-3 judgments must agree; a win on frozen goldens and a loss in paired comparison is a real signal, not a discrepancy to explain away.
  4. Canary. 5–10% stratified rollout with auto-rollback for any checkpoint reaching production traffic. Local-only users stop at stage 3 — skipping stage 4 for a local deployment is the correct stopping point, not a shortcut.

Drift Budget

Drift (pts)Verdict
≤1Noise — proceed
2–5Rerun with seed variation before deciding
>5HARD FAIL — no exception for task gains

The >5pt row governs regardless of the others: a checkpoint that gained 8 points on the target task and lost 6 points of general capability still fails here — task improvement never buys back a drift-budget breach.

Item count derives from the budget, not convenience: the strict n for a half-width under half the 5pt hard-fail threshold is ~1,300 at typical accuracy (p≈0.7); n=200 is a pragmatic floor (±6pt half-width at that same p, n=50 ±13pt) — report the half-width with every verdict, and treat a margin smaller than it as REJECT (uncertain), not PASS/HARD FAIL. Full math and a 5-run cautionary example: references/gate-templates.md.

RERUN is not a verdict. A 2–5pt drift only ever produces a PROMOTE or REJECT after the seed-variation rerun completes — PROMOTE requires landing back at ≤1pt (noise); any rerun still

1pt — 2–5pt band or >5pt breach alike — resolves stage 2 to a hard REJECT. No report may reach the Verdict section with stage 2 still showing RERUN.

Catastrophic Forgetting

Unmanaged LoRA fine-tuning loses real general capability, and stage 2 is what catches it:

  • ~43% knowledge loss unmanaged — no replay, no regularization.
  • ~10% with basic management — some replay or a conservative LR.
  • ~3% with replay + EWC — the disciplined case.
  • 10–30% general-data replay mix is the standard mitigation — blend general- domain data into training rather than target-task data alone.

If a checkpoint hits the >5pt hard fail in stage 2, work this escalation ladder in order — the one canonical order this skill and references/gate-templates.md both point to:

  1. Adjust the replay-mix fraction — swap rows, don't add them (adding confounds fraction with total optimizer steps). Dose is not monotonic at small-run scale (<~100 steps) — re-check drift after any swap.
  2. Lower the learning rate.
  3. Fewer epochs.
  4. A smaller LoRA rank — the same rank/LR levers lora-qlora-recipes and preference-optimization tune for the training run, applied here in reverse.

This order is a default, not a law: remediation guidance from a single before/after run pair is a hypothesis — label it low-confidence once any lever produces a reversal, and prefer a seed-variation repeat over trusting the next rung blindly. A lever that clears the drift breach but drops a success-criterion metric below target is a two-sided tradeoff for a human, not a reason to keep descending the ladder. Full reasoning and the 5-run trajectory behind both caveats: references/gate-templates.md.

Disclose drift-suite instruction reuse. A replay row copying the drift harness's exact instruction phrasing (not just disjoint source items) makes that benchmark's post-replay score an upper bound — flag it instruction-familiar, or re-probe with a paraphrase, before treating a near-budget pass as clean.

The Verdict

promotion-report.md covers all four stages as sections and must end with a terminal verdict: PROMOTE or REJECT, the evidence that produced it, and exactly one top remediation when the verdict is REJECT. Template: references/gate-templates.md. The terminal contract other skills parse:

## Verdict

REJECT

Evidence: domain-adjacent drift
suite dropped 6.2pt (threshold:
>5pt hard fail) despite +8pt on
the target task.

Top remediation: swap the
replay-mix fraction from 10%
toward 20%, holding step count
constant.
  • REJECT is a result, not an error. A checkpoint that fails stage 2's drift budget or stage 3's arena comparison did its job. Don't treat a REJECT as a failed run needing a rerun of this skill; it's the correct output of a working gate.
  • One remediation, not a menu. Evidence sections may list everything observed; the verdict section names the single highest-leverage fix per the escalation ladder above. A report that hedges across three possible fixes hasn't done the prioritization this skill exists to do.
  • No auto-retraining. This skill produces a verdict and a report, not a re-triggered training run. A REJECT hands the remediation back to a human decision at finetuning-method-selection or the relevant training skill.

Related Skills

  • eval-harness-first — owns the drift suite and baseline this skill re-runs and diffs against; no baseline-<model>.json means nothing to gate against.
  • quantized-export — the only valid next step after a PROMOTE verdict.
  • preference-optimization and lora-qlora-recipes — own the LR and rank levers in the Catastrophic Forgetting escalation path; this skill diagnoses the breach, those skills own the config that caused it.
  • dataset-curation — owns the replay-mix construction recipe the escalation ladder's first rung applies.

Complete promotion-report.md template with all four stages, the drift-suite scoring table, the paired-arena protocol (item count, position randomization, win-rate threshold), and a replay-mix configuration example: references/gate-templates.md.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Build and review interfaces against WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidelines. Covers keyboard navigation, screen readers that read interface content aloud, accessible forms, mobile support, and display preferences, helping identify and fix barriers to using a website or app.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Audit an interface for accessibility issues
  • Add keyboard navigation and focus management
  • Improve screen reader support for forms
wshobson/agents4.1万2026年10月19日 更新

Review AI-generated code for problems hidden behind successful runs. Check failure handling, resource cleanup, unusual inputs, nonexistent dependencies, and departures from project conventions to identify missing safeguards before merging or accepting the work as complete.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Audit code after an AI generation session
  • Review an AI-generated pull request before merging
  • Investigate brittle code that appears to work
wshobson/agents4.1万2026年10月19日 更新

Build Apache Airflow workflows for data pipelines and scheduled jobs. The skill guides task dependencies, retries, waiting for conditions, testing, and deployment, with patterns for tasks that can be safely rerun.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Building scheduled data pipelines
  • Designing task order and dependencies
  • Implementing custom tasks and condition checks
wshobson/agents4.1万2026年10月19日 更新

Plan and carry out an AngularJS to Angular migration, from choosing a rewrite strategy to converting components, services, and routes. Includes a hybrid approach that runs both frameworks together while individual features are migrated.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Planning an AngularJS to Angular migration
  • Moving a large app one feature at a time
  • Converting directives into Angular components
wshobson/agents4.1万2026年10月19日 更新

Identify software protections that hinder inspection, such as debugger detection and obfuscation that makes code harder to understand. Support authorized binary analysis and CTF security challenges with protection findings, bypass strategies, reports, and analysis scripts.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Identify protections in an authorized malware sample
  • Plan analysis of a packed executable
  • Implement debugger detection for a CTF challenge
wshobson/agents4.1万2026年10月19日 更新

Design and review REST and GraphQL APIs with consistent naming, data structures, error responses, pagination for large result sets, and versioning strategies. Helps teams define shared standards and plan changes that existing clients can adopt gradually.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Designing a new REST or GraphQL API
  • Reviewing API specifications before implementation
  • Establishing shared API design standards
wshobson/agents4.1万2026年10月19日 更新

查看 wshobson 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题