4e13f7881e
Langfuse aggregates scores by name, so one name may only carry values on
one scale. recall_top_score was emitted for every method, mixing HYBRID's
LR-sigmoid probability and AGENTIC's cross-encoder score (both comparable
in [0, 1]) with KEYWORD's unbounded BM25 and single-route VECTOR's cosine.
A chart on that name averaged the two scales, and in practice a keyword
score can read numerically higher than a calibrated one while meaning less.
Uncalibrated methods now report recall_top_score_raw, leaving
recall_top_score comparable across methods and over time. Every recall
score also carries metadata = {method, calibrated}: a structured field
Langfuse persists and can split on, which the free-text comment could not
serve. The comment stays for reading individual scores.
Breaking for anyone charting recall_top_score for keyword search; 1.2.0 is
four days old, so this is the cheapest moment to correct the naming.
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UyKinsWs1MgoARPoB9R4NW
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| test_lifespan | ||
| test_middleware | ||
| test_observability | ||
| test_persistence | ||
| __init__.py | ||
| test_context.py | ||
| test_errors.py | ||