Files
waggle-os/benchmarks/preregistration/manifest-v8.1-multi-benchmark.md
Oleg Maslov 0c3e2ead3b
Some checks failed
Installer Smoke / installer-smoke (push) Has been cancelled
moving
2026-09-02 10:10:29 +02:00

450 lines
21 KiB
Markdown
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# Manifest v8.1 — Multi-Benchmark Programme Amendment
## GAIA 2 · BEAM · LongMemEval-V2 · Terminal-Bench 2.0
**Manifest version:** v8.1.0-preregistration (amends v8.0.0)
**Preregistered date:** 2026-06-04
**Authority:** PM (Marko Marković)
**Supersedes:** manifest-v8-gaia2-preregistration (v8.0.0) for scope section only.
All methodology in v8.0.0 §1§9 for GAIA 2 remains intact and unmodified.
This document adds three new benchmark tracks (BEAM, LongMemEval-V2, Terminal-Bench 2.0)
and defines their preregistered methodology, runability status, and relationship to the
central I/P/B frame architectural claim.
**Machine-readable twin:** `manifest-v8.1-multi-benchmark.yaml` (companion file)
---
## 0. Amendment rationale
v8.0.0 scoped the v8 benchmark programme to GAIA 2 only. This amendment adds three
parallel tracks following a landscape review (2026-06-04) that identified:
1. **BEAM** — the only benchmark with an explicit, unsolved Contradiction Resolution (CR)
category. CR is the direct evaluation target for hive-mind I/P/B B-frames. Runnable
today with minimal adapter work. Highest priority addition.
2. **LongMemEval-V2** — brand new (May 2026), no published competitor results, uses
web agent trajectories as memory haystacks. A different evaluation surface from V1
and from LoCoMo. High publication opportunity precisely because it's fresh.
3. **Terminal-Bench 2.0** — positioning data only. Not a memory or agentic-task benchmark.
Submission-only (no public runner). Qwen3.6-35B baseline already on leaderboard at
24.6% via `little-coder`. Included as a capability floor reference, not as a
primary scientific claim.
---
## 1. Four-benchmark overview
| Track | Benchmark | Primary claim | Runability | Adapter effort | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| **A** | **BEAM** | I/P/B B-frames solve unsolved CR category | **Runnable now**`pip install` + download script | Low — JSONL conversation → DatasetInstance | **Sprint 13, Phase 1** |
| **B** | **GAIA 2 / ARE** | I/P/B frames lift Ambiguity + Adaptability splits | Blocked — SIGALRM fix required | High — ARE adapter + contradiction gate | Sprint 14, Phase 1 after SIGALRM |
| **C** | **LongMemEval-V2** | Substrate advantage on web agent trajectory memory | Partially runnable — haystacks available, no public runner yet | Medium-high — trajectory Insert/Query API, multimodal, 25M+ token haystacks | Sprint 1415, after BEAM |
| **D** | **Terminal-Bench 2.0** | Positioning floor for waggle on coding tasks | Submission-only | None — submit scaffold as-is | Anytime — submit existing agent |
**Execution priority:** A → B (parallel after SIGALRM fix) → C → D (asynchronous).
The central scientific claim across all tracks:
> **Substrate (I/P/B hive-mind) > subject model selection.**
> Demonstrated on memory recall (LoCoMo, done), contradiction resolution (BEAM, Track A),
> stateful task completion (GAIA 2, Track B), and trajectory experience memory (LME-V2, Track C).
---
## 2. Track A — BEAM
### 2.1 What BEAM actually is
**Paper:** "Beyond a Million Tokens: Benchmarking and Enhancing Long-Term Memory in LLMs"
(arXiv:2510.27246, ICLR 2026). Authors: Tavakoli, Salemi, Ye, Abdalla, Zamani, Mitchell.
**Repo:** https://github.com/mohammadtavakoli78/BEAM
**License:** Not explicitly stated on repo (academic use; no commercial restriction noted).
**Dataset:** 100 conversations × 4 context scales (128K / 500K / 1M / 10M tokens).
**Questions:** 2,000 probing questions across 10 memory ability categories.
### 2.2 BEAM categories and hive-mind relevance
| Category | Abbrev | Direct I/P/B relevance | Current SOTA status |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Contradiction Resolution** | CR | **Highest** — B-frames are designed for exactly this | **Unsolved** — worst-performing category across all tested models |
| **Knowledge Update** | KU | High — B-frames track fact revision | Moderate performance |
| **Instruction Following** | IF | High — P-frames record instructions; B-frames detect violations | Moderate |
| **Preference Following** | PF | Medium — I-frames track preferences | Moderate |
| Multi-Session Reasoning | MR | Medium | Moderate |
| Temporal Reasoning | TR | Low (same signal as LoCoMo negative control) | Moderate |
| Information Extraction | IE | Low | High |
| Event Ordering | EO | Low | Moderate |
| Abstention | ABS | Low | High |
| Summarization | SUM | Low | High |
**Primary focus for Track A:** CR + KU as confirmatory; IF + PF as secondary descriptive.
IE, EO, ABS, SUM as negative controls (hive-mind should not help here).
### 2.3 BEAM runability assessment
```bash
# Installation — no known blockers
git clone https://github.com/mohammadtavakoli78/BEAM
pip install -r requirements.txt
# Dataset download (pre-built, no generation needed for evaluation)
python src/beam/download_dataset.py
# → downloads to data/ directory; chat sizes 128K/500K/1M/10M
# Answer generation
EVAL_TYPE="rag" # hive-mind cells use RAG eval type
bash src/model_inference/answer_generation.sh
# Evaluation
python -m src.evaluation.run_evaluation \
--input_directory results/128K \
--chat_size 128K \
--start_index 0 --end_index 20 \
--max_workers 4 \
--allowed_result_files [cell_output_files]
```
**No SIGALRM issue. No Windows signal dependency. Python-native pipeline.**
LLM config: `src/llms_config.json` — add Qwen3.6-35B DashScope + Opus 4.x entries.
Judge: LLM-as-judge (configurable; use Llama-3.3-70B for leaderboard comparability).
### 2.4 Harness adapter for BEAM (Track A build tasks)
The waggle-os harness `DatasetInstance` schema maps cleanly:
| BEAM field | DatasetInstance field | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| conversation text (full) | `context` | Truncated per BEAM's chat_size (128K/500K/1M/10M) |
| probing question | `question` | One question per instance |
| reference answer | `expected[]` | BEAM uses nugget scoring; adapter extracts string answers |
| conversation_id | `conversation_id` | BEAM conversation index |
| memory_ability category | metadata only | Not in DatasetInstance schema; stored in output JSONL |
**`DatasetSpec.id`:** `'beam'` — add to the union in `types.ts` alongside existing `'locomo' | 'longmemeval' | 'synthetic'`.
**New build task B1:** `benchmarks/harness/scripts/build-beam-canonical.ts` — analogous to `build-locomo-canonical.ts`. Converts BEAM JSON format to JSONL with `DatasetInstance` schema. Emit one instance per (conversation_id × question) pair. Record SHA-256 of source download.
**New build task B2:** `benchmarks/harness/src/cells-beam.ts` — four cells for BEAM (no_memory_baseline, hive_mind_retrieval, hive_mind_ipb, hive_mind_ipb_strong). Identical architecture to GAIA 2 cells except:
- Input is a long conversation (not an ARE scenario)
- Output scoring uses BEAM's LLM judge, not ARE verifier
- No write-action oracle — BEAM is read-only (QA over memory)
**New build task B3:** BEAM judge integration — call `src/evaluation/run_evaluation.py` from the TypeScript harness via child_process, or replicate the judge logic in `judge-beam.ts` using the same Llama-3.3-70B soft judge as GAIA 2.
### 2.5 BEAM primary hypothesis
> **I/P/B-augmented hive-mind improves Contradiction Resolution (CR) score on BEAM
> vs. no-memory baseline by ≥ 8 percentage points, at α = 0.10 one-sided.**
**Scope:** 128K tier primary (all 20 conversations, CR + KU + IF questions only, N ≈ 200300 questions depending on BEAM distribution).
**Extension:** 1M tier as secondary descriptive (hive-mind advantage should widen at scale).
**10M tier:** not in v8.1 scope (wall-clock cost + `:memory:` SQLite constraint at 10M tokens — requires chunked ingestion; deferred to v9).
**Secondary BEAM endpoints:**
- S_B1: KU monotonicity (no_memory ≤ hive_mind_retrieval ≤ hive_mind_ipb)
- S_B2: Negative control — IE, EO, SUM: hive_mind_ipb ≈ no_memory_baseline (≤ 3pp Δ)
- S_B3: Substrate-is-the-moat — Opus 4.x vs Qwen3.6 on hive_mind_ipb (CR category)
### 2.6 BEAM cells
| Cell | Substrate | Frame types |
|---|---|---|
| `no_memory_baseline` | none | none |
| `hive_mind_retrieval` | HybridSearch, I-frames only | I |
| `hive_mind_ipb` | Full substrate | I + P + B |
| `hive_mind_ipb_strong` | Full substrate | I + P + B |
**Note:** For BEAM, P-frames are written when the probing question is asked (recording the agent's retrieval intent). B-frames are written when retrieved content contradicts an earlier I-frame. The contradiction gate fires before answer generation (not before a write action, as in GAIA 2).
### 2.7 BEAM budget
| Component | Est. cost |
|---|---|
| N≈300 questions × 4 cells × 128K tier, Qwen3.6 | ~$812 |
| Opus 4.x cell (hive_mind_ipb_strong) | ~$1520 |
| BEAM LLM judge (Llama-3.3-70B, N=1200 questions) | ~$35 |
| **Total expected** | **~$2637** |
**Hard halt:** $50 for Track A.
---
## 3. Track B — GAIA 2 / ARE
No changes to v8.0.0 methodology. Full preregistration at
`benchmarks/preregistration/manifest-v8-gaia2-preregistration.md`.
**Status:** Blocked on SIGALRM fix. Track A (BEAM) runs first in Sprint 13.
GAIA 2 Phase 1 begins in Sprint 14 after:
1. SIGALRM resolution (WSL2 preferred)
2. BEAM Track A results available (inform whether I/P/B contradiction gate works as expected before building GAIA 2 adapter)
**Dependency:** Track A is the methodological pilot for the contradiction gate.
If B-frames don't lift CR on BEAM (Track A fails), revisit the gate design before
investing Sprint 14 effort in the GAIA 2 adapter.
---
## 4. Track C — LongMemEval-V2
### 4.1 What LME-V2 actually is
**Paper:** "LongMemEval-V2: Evaluating Long-Term Agent Memory on Web Agent Trajectories"
(arXiv:2605.12493, May 2026). Lead: Xiaowu Li (UCLA).
**Website:** https://xiaowu0162.github.io/longmemeval-v2/
**Questions:** 451 manually curated.
**Context scale:** 25M tokens (Small, 100 trajectories) / 115M tokens (Medium, 500 trajectories).
**Tiers:** LME-V2-Small (100-trajectory shared haystack) / LME-V2-Medium (500-trajectory question-specific).
**Critical distinction from V1:** LME-V2 is a **web agent experience memory** benchmark.
Memory haystacks are web browsing trajectories (screenshot + accessibility tree + BrowserGym action).
It is NOT a conversational memory benchmark. This is a fundamentally different evaluation surface.
**Five memory abilities in V2:**
1. **Static State Recall** — remember a fact from agent history (closest to LoCoMo V1)
2. **Dynamic State Tracking** — track evolving state across trajectory steps
3. **Workflow Knowledge** — remember procedural patterns from past agent sessions
4. **Environment Gotchas** — recall known failure modes in the current environment
5. **Premise Awareness** — detect that a question assumes something false about the environment
**hive-mind fit by category:**
- Dynamic State Tracking → **high** (P-frames record state before actions; B-frames track state changes)
- Environment Gotchas → **high** (I-frames accumulate error observations; B-frames flag recurrence)
- Premise Awareness → **medium** (B-frames can detect false premises if prior I-frames contain contradicting evidence)
- Static State Recall → low (same as LoCoMo; retrieval is sufficient)
- Workflow Knowledge → low (procedural; I-frame accumulation is sufficient)
### 4.2 LME-V2 runability assessment
**Current status: partially runnable.**
- Trajectory dataset: available via project website (haystacks can be downloaded)
- Evaluation harness: **no public runner released yet** as of 2026-06-04
- Paper uses Codex + GPT-5.4-mini as the evaluation agent
- AgentLab framework (ServiceNow): https://github.com/ServiceNow/AgentLab — provides the execution environment
- **The Insert/Query API is the evaluation interface**, not a CLI benchmark runner
**Adapter complexity:** High. Each trajectory contains screenshot + accessibility tree + BrowserGym action. Ingesting into hive-mind requires:
1. Stripping screenshots (or OCR-ing them) for I-frame text content
2. Treating each trajectory step as an I-frame with metadata (trajectory_id, step_index, action)
3. Implementing `Insert(trajectory)` and `Query(question)` over hive-mind's HybridSearch
**Recommendation:** Target **LME-V2-Small only** in v8.1. 100 trajectories per question, text-only (accessibility tree, no screenshots). Defer multimodal screenshots to v9.
### 4.3 LME-V2 preregistration (conditional)
**LME-V2 execution is GATED on Track A (BEAM) completion AND PM-RATIFY-V8C.**
Rationale: LME-V2 is a significant new adapter build (~comparable to GAIA 2). Running it before BEAM validates the I/P/B integration would be premature. PM ratification is required before Sprint 15 build allocation.
**Provisional primary hypothesis for LME-V2 (subject to PM ratification):**
> I/P/B-augmented hive-mind improves Dynamic State Tracking + Environment Gotchas
> on LME-V2-Small vs. no-memory baseline by ≥ 8 percentage points.
**Provisional cells:** identical to BEAM (4 cells). Reader model: Qwen3.5-9B per paper baseline.
**N:** 451 questions on Small tier (100-trajectory haystack).
**LME-V2 build tasks (pre-ratification design only):**
- C1: `benchmarks/longmemeval-v2/src/adapter.ts` — trajectory → I-frame ingestion (text-only, accessibility tree)
- C2: `benchmarks/longmemeval-v2/src/cells-lmev2.ts` — 4 cells implementing Insert/Query protocol
- C3: `benchmarks/longmemeval-v2/src/judge-lmev2.ts` — normalized string match (structured) + LLM judge (free-form)
### 4.4 LME-V2 budget (provisional)
| Component | Est. cost |
|---|---|
| N=451 × 4 cells × Qwen3.6 reader | ~$1015 |
| Opus 4.x strong cell | ~$2030 |
| LLM judge (GPT-5.2 medium per paper) | ~$510 |
| **Total expected** | **~$3555** |
**Hard halt:** $65 for Track C.
---
## 5. Track D — Terminal-Bench 2.0
### 5.1 Status and rationale
Terminal-Bench 2.0 tests long-horizon agentic coding and system administration in
terminal environments. Waggle is not a coding system. This track is **positioning
data only** — it establishes waggle's floor on a broadly-followed leaderboard and
provides a signal about whether the general agent scaffold (not the memory substrate)
is competitive.
**Critical fact: Qwen3.6-35B via `little-coder` is already on the leaderboard at
entries #118 and #123 at 24.6% ± 3.2 and 23.0% respectively (submitted 2026-05-14).
This baseline exists.** No new run is required to have a data point.
### 5.2 What a waggle submission would add
The `little-coder` entries (#118/#123) use Qwen3.6-35B but no waggle scaffold and
no hive-mind. A waggle-scaffolded submission would test:
- Whether waggle's tool-calling loop (ReAct + Plan-Execute + Critic hybrid per v7 GEPA)
outperforms a bare `little-coder` harness on terminal tasks
- Whether hive-mind memory helps on long-running tasks (task-state persistence)
**Expected result:** moderate improvement from waggle scaffold (architectural advantage);
small or zero improvement from hive-mind (terminal tasks are not memory-intensive in
the same way as LoCoMo/BEAM/GAIA 2).
### 5.3 Terminal-Bench 2.0 runability
**Submission-only via `harborframework/terminal-bench-2-leaderboard`.**
No public runner or local evaluation. Requires submitting agent code; Terminal-Bench
team runs the evaluation.
**Current leaderboard context (as of 2026-06-02):**
- Top: `vix` + Claude Opus 4.7 = 90.2%
- Claude Code + Claude Opus 4.6 = 58.0% (#52)
- `little-coder` + Qwen3.6-35B-A3B = 24.6% (#118) — our baseline
- Waggle scaffold target: ≥ 35% (matching Claude Opus 4.5 era baselines)
### 5.4 Terminal-Bench submission plan
**No preregistration required** — Terminal-Bench is positioning data, not a confirmatory
scientific claim. The submission is not governed by waggle-os preregistration policy.
**Execution:** submit to `harborframework/terminal-bench-2-leaderboard` after BEAM
Track A completion (Sprint 13 end). Use Qwen3.6-35B + waggle scaffold, no hive-mind
(isolate scaffold contribution). If scaffold submission scores ≥ 35%, add a second
submission with hive-mind to test the memory lift.
**No budget cap required** — Terminal-Bench evaluations run on their infrastructure.
---
## 6. Amended execution timeline
```
Sprint 13 (now)
├── Track A: BEAM Phase 1
│ ├── build-beam-canonical.ts (B1)
│ ├── cells-beam.ts (B2)
│ ├── judge-beam.ts (B3)
│ └── N≈300 × 4 cells execution (Qwen3.6 + Opus 4.x)
├── Track D: Terminal-Bench submission
│ └── Submit waggle scaffold (async, no gate)
Sprint 14
├── Track B: GAIA 2 Phase 1 (after SIGALRM fix + BEAM CR result validates gate)
│ ├── SIGALRM resolution (WSL2)
│ ├── ARE adapter (A1A5)
│ └── N=500 × 4 cells execution
├── PM-RATIFY-V8C decision: proceed with LME-V2?
Sprint 15 (conditional)
└── Track C: LongMemEval-V2 (gated on PM-RATIFY-V8C)
├── Trajectory adapter (C1C3)
└── N=451 × 4 cells execution
```
---
## 7. Cross-benchmark claim architecture
The four tracks build a layered argument:
```
Layer 1 (DONE) LoCoMo v5 → substrate > model on factoid recall
Qwen 73.4% ≈ Opus 73.1% with hive-mind
Layer 2 (BEAM) BEAM 128K CR/KU → I/P/B B-frames solve unsolved CR category
[Track A] → first published system to address the open problem
Layer 3 (GAIA 2) ARE Ambiguity + → I/P/B lift carries into stateful write-action environment
Adaptability → substrate > model on interactive agent tasks
[Track B]
Layer 4 (LME-V2) Web agent → Dynamic State + Gotcha categories: P/B frames
trajectories → track agent state and recurring failures
[Track C]
Positioning Terminal-Bench → waggle scaffold competitiveness floor
[Track D]
```
The claim stacks: each layer adds a new evaluation surface while reusing the same
architectural claim. The B-frame contradiction gate is the single mechanism tested
across BEAM (QA), GAIA 2 (write-action), and LME-V2 (trajectory).
---
## 8. Amended gates
### Gate A-P+ (Track A Phase 1 kick)
**Pre-kick checks:**
- BEAM dataset download complete and SHA-256 recorded
- `build-beam-canonical.ts` output validated (N instances ≥ 1,800 for 128K tier)
- `cells-beam.ts` dry-run passes (all 4 cells, 5-instance smoke)
- LiteLLM config includes Qwen3.6 DashScope + Llama-3.3-70B judge aliases
- hive-mind `:memory:` substrate liveness confirmed
- Budget envelope confirmed ($50 hard halt)
**Action:** kick N≈300 × 4 cells.
### Gate A-D (Track A post-run)
**Action:** CC writes `benchmarks/beam/results/v8a-gate-d-exit-report.md`.
**PM decides:**
1. Is the CR lift ≥ 8pp? If yes → proceed to GAIA 2 (B) and LME-V2 gate
2. Is the contradiction gate working? If no → redesign gate before GAIA 2
3. Terminal-Bench submission: submit waggle scaffold result
### Gate V8C-PM (Track C authorization)
Separate PM ratification required before LME-V2 build starts.
---
## 9. Budget summary
| Track | Hard halt | Expected burn |
|---|---|---|
| A — BEAM | $50 | $2637 |
| B — GAIA 2 | $80 | $4173 (per v8.0.0) |
| C — LME-V2 | $65 | $3555 (provisional) |
| D — Terminal-Bench | $0 (external infra) | $0 |
| **Programme total** | **$195** | **$102165** |
---
## 10. Scope boundaries (amended)
### Added at Gate A-D:
- BEAM CR + KU lift magnitude + significance (pre-registered cells + models, 128K tier)
- BEAM negative control result (IE, EO, SUM)
- Contradiction gate firing rate on BEAM conversations
### Added at Gate D (GAIA 2, per v8.0.0):
- Per v8.0.0 §12 (unchanged)
### Added at Gate C-D (LME-V2, conditional):
- Dynamic State Tracking + Environment Gotchas lift on LME-V2-Small
- Trajectory I-frame ingestion lift vs. no-memory baseline
### NOT claimable from Track D:
- Terminal-Bench results are NOT a preregistered claim; they are positioning data
### Cannot claim from any track:
- "Waggle OS beats [model X] on all benchmarks" — each track has specific splits and conditions
- Generalization beyond the preregistered cells and models
---
## 11. Related artefacts
- **v8.0.0 anchor:** `benchmarks/preregistration/manifest-v8-gaia2-preregistration.md`
(commit SHA `a3ae4cada43c` / `51b6bcc9c39c`)
- **BEAM repo:** https://github.com/mohammadtavakoli78/BEAM (ICLR 2026)
- **LME-V2 paper:** https://arxiv.org/html/2605.12493v1 (May 2026)
- **Terminal-Bench 2.0 leaderboard:** https://www.tbench.ai/leaderboard/terminal-bench/2.0
- **`little-coder` baseline entries:** #118 (24.6% ± 3.2) and #123 (23.0%), submitted 2026-05-14
- **hive-mind LoCoMo v5 results:** `hive-mind/benchmarks/locomo/RESULTS.md`
---
_End of Manifest v8.1 amendment. v8.0.0 GAIA 2 methodology is unchanged._
_v8.1 governs Track A (BEAM) and Track C (LME-V2) preregistration._
_Track D (Terminal-Bench) is positioning data, not governed by preregistration policy._