# Research Integration: Logarithmic Scores, Power-Law Discoveries: Disentangling Measurement from Coverage in Agent-Based Ev
## Your Mission
Create a new branch and develop a detailed implementation plan for integrating this research idea into the codebase. Do NOT implement yet — focus on understanding, planning, and identifying risks.
## Branch Setup
```bash
git checkout -b experiment/logarithmic-scores-power-law-discoveries-disentang
```
## The Research
**Paper**: [Logarithmic Scores, Power-Law Discoveries: Disentangling Measurement from Coverage in Agent-Based Ev](https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.00477v1)
**PDF**: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.00477v1
**Core Achievement**:
Validated quality scores improve logarithmically with panel size across 960 sessions.
**Why This Matters for idea-transfer-bruteforce-cc-v1**:
Provides the mathematical scaling laws needed to justify the number of replicates in the endosymbiosis report.
**Suggested Integration Approach**:
Apply the power-law discovery formula to calculate minimum replicates for Rep4 arms in REPORT_COUNTERFACTUAL.md.
**Estimated Effort**: quick read
## Goal Context
This addresses the following project goal:
> Establish statistical power requirements for comparing AOCC differences
## Model Requirements
**Commercial APIs available**: GPT-4, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Grok 4.1, GLM-5
**Open-source (local GPU)**: DeepSeek V3.2
✅ **You can implement this using API calls only** — no local GPU required.
*The paper demonstrates that persona-based agent judges can be implemented using commercial APIs (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI) and that these API-based judges produce evaluations indistinguishable from human raters without requiring local fine-tuning.*
**Benchmarks used**: Turing-style validation, MT-Bench, Chatbot Arena
## Your Task: Create the Integration Plan
### Phase 1: Understand the Codebase Context
1. **Identify the integration surface**: Which files/modules would this touch?
2. **Map dependencies**: What existing code would this interact with?
3. **Find similar patterns**: Is there existing code that does something similar we can learn from?
### Phase 2: Design the Integration
Create a detailed plan covering:
1. **Architecture**: How does this fit into the existing system?
2. **Data flow**: What inputs does it need? What outputs does it produce?
3. **Configuration**: What new settings/parameters are needed?
4. **Testing strategy**: How will we validate this works?
### Phase 3: Premortem — What Could Go Wrong?
**Think about this integration failing 2 weeks from now. Why did it fail?**
Consider:
- **Performance**: Could this slow down critical paths?
- **Complexity**: Are we adding too much complexity for the benefit?
- **Maintenance**: Will this be hard to maintain or debug?
- **Dependencies**: Are we adding risky dependencies?
- **Edge cases**: What inputs or states could break this?
- **Rollback**: If this doesn't work, how easily can we revert?
For each risk, note:
- Likelihood (low/medium/high)
- Impact (low/medium/high)
- Mitigation strategy
### Phase 4: Define Success Criteria
Before implementing, define:
1. **Minimum viable test**: What's the simplest way to prove this works?
2. **Quantitative metrics**: What numbers should improve? By how much?
3. **Qualitative checks**: What should "feel" better?
4. **Failure signals**: What would tell us to abandon this approach?
## Output Format
Create a `PLAN.md` file in the repo root with:
```markdown
# Experiment: [Title]
## Summary
[1-2 sentence summary of what we're trying]
## Integration Points
- [ ] File 1: description of changes
- [ ] File 2: description of changes
## Architecture Decision
[Explain the chosen approach and why]
## Risks & Mitigations
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|--------|------------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
## Success Criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2
## Open Questions
- Question 1?
- Question 2?
## Next Steps
1. First implementation step
2. Second implementation step
```
## Important Guidelines
- **Read the paper first** — skim the abstract, intro, and methodology sections
- **Don't over-engineer** — start with the simplest version that could work
- **Preserve optionality** — design so we can easily extend or remove this later
- **Document decisions** — future you will thank present you
- **Ask questions** — if something is unclear, note it rather than assuming
---
*This prompt was generated by DSI (Daily Session Intelligence) to help you systematically explore research ideas.*