summarize todays evals

[cmungall]

@claude
https://github.com/bioepic-data/data-harmonization-eval/pulls

we have various evals that have been run... summarize them... did they all essentially work?

[claude]

Claude finished @cmungall's task —— View job

---

Summary of today's evals

• Enumerate the PRs / branches
• Map PRs to eval branches
• Assess what the evals were and how they relate
• Report findings

⚠️ Tooling caveat: In this CI sandbox gh, curl, and git fetch are all blocked, and the WebFetch tool is currently erroring (its backing model claude-3-5-haiku-20241022 returns 404). The only network call that succeeded was git ls-remote. So I could not read PR bodies, CI check statuses, or the actual result files inside each PR branch — the results/ dir on main is empty (only .gitkeep placeholders). The summary below is reconstructed from the branch/PR topology plus the design in README.md. To get a true pass/fail per eval I'd need --allowedTools to include Bash(gh:*) or Bash(git fetch:*)/Bash(curl:*).

What the evals are

Per README.md, this is a leave-one-out cross-validation (Phase A) over 19 expert-harmonized soil-moisture datasets, evaluating a curator (Skill 1) + harmonizer (Skill 2) agent pair. The "evals run today" map cleanly onto a set of per-fold PRs plus one aggregate PR:

Eval	Branch	PR
Fold 01	codex/fold01-agent-evaluation	#37
Fold 02	codex/fold02-agent-evaluation	#28
Fold 03	codex/fold03-agent-evaluation	#15
Fold 04	codex/fold04-agent-evaluation	#24
Fold 05	codex/fold05-agent-evaluation	#20
Fold 06	codex/fold06-agent-evaluation	#26
Fold 07	codex/fold07-agent-evaluation	#27
Fold 08	codex/fold08-agent-evaluation	#29
Fold 09	codex/fold09-agent-evaluation	#30
Fold 10	codex/fold10-agent-evaluation	#32
Fold 11	codex/fold11-agent-evaluation	#34
Fold 12	codex/fold12-agent-evaluation	#35
Fold 13	codex/fold13-agent-evaluation	#36
Overall benchmark	codex/overall-benchmark-evaluation	#38

So there are 13 per-fold eval runs + 1 overall benchmark = 14 eval PRs, all from the codex/* automation. (Separately, infrastructure PRs like feat/invigilator #21 — already merged — feat/build-env, fix/wire-skills, fix/comment_harmonizers, codex-stage-raw-data-public-fallback, and several claude/* research/refactor branches exist, but those are harness/setup, not eval runs.)

Did they "essentially work"?

I can say the eval harness was exercised end-to-end — 13 of the planned folds each produced a dedicated branch+PR, plus an aggregate roll-up (#38), which is exactly the expected shape if the CV pipeline completed across folds. That topology strongly suggests the runs executed rather than crashed on launch.

However, I cannot confirm the actual scores/pass-rates (output-equivalence, executability, etc.) from here because the result artifacts live inside each PR branch and I'm blocked from fetching them. Two open questions I couldn't resolve:

1. Note there are 13 fold branches but the study describes 19 datasets — folds may be grouped (the README mentions grouped leave-one-out over source clusters), so 13 ≠ a problem, but worth confirming against config/cv_folds.yaml.
2. Whether any individual fold's harmonizer code failed executability or scored near-zero on output equivalence.

To finish this properly

Re-run me with one of:

• Bash(gh:*) — I'll pull each PR's body, CI checks, and the results/scored/*.csv to tabulate per-fold mean ± CI and a true worked/failed verdict; or
• Bash(git fetch:*) — I'll fetch each codex/fold* branch and read its results/ directly.
  · branch claude/issue-40-20260630-2346