test: add fixed-parameter calibration true-parameter coverage - #78
Conversation
|
Status note: local checks on this PR are green, including the R package check, but this PR does not yet have the central Per the repository maintenance requirement, please do not merge this PR until the organization required-workflow ruleset is repaired for |
|
Updated governance evidence after ContextualWisdomLab/.github#124 merged:
Per the queue policy for this repository, I am leaving this PR unmerged until an org admin repairs the central required-workflow targeting so this PR receives current-head |
|
Central
Both jobs are currently queued in GitHub Actions. I am leaving this PR unmerged until those central runs complete and produce same-head Strix evidence plus OpenCode approval. |
|
Update on central evidence: the first manual Strix target run exposed a I opened ContextualWisdomLab/.github#135 to fix manual Strix target runs so This PR remains unmerged until same-head central Strix evidence and OpenCode approval exist. |
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues. FindingsNo blocking findings. SummaryVerification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including docs/fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md.
Change Flow DAGflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
Evidence --> S3["Test: test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R"]
S3 --> I3["regression suite"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: Test: test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R"]
R3 --> V3["targeted test run"]
|
![opencode-agent[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1549082?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode model attempts did not emit a usable current-head control block, so the approval gate used deterministic current-head evidence instead of model prose.
Findings
No blocking findings.
Summary
- Result: APPROVE
- Reason: coverage-evidence passed, peer GitHub Checks completed without failures, mergeability was clean, and no unresolved human review threads remained.
- Deterministic evidence: current-head changed-file evidence (R/aFIPC.R, docs/fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md, man/autoFIPC.Rd, tests/testthat/test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R); coverage-evidence result success; peer checks from statusCheckRollup excluding this OpenCode check.
- Model outcomes: primary=unknown, fallback=unknown, second_fallback=unknown, catalog_fallback=unknown.
- Head SHA:
bc78373f59310b6fbee76d1a5a72fb3d84fc84eb - Workflow run: 28422861653
- Workflow attempt: 1
Deterministic fallback approval was used only after model-output instability and did not bypass coverage, failed-check, mergeability, or human-review gates.
Change Flow DAG
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
Evidence --> S3["Test: test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R"]
S3 --> I3["regression suite"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: Test: test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R"]
R3 --> V3["targeted test run"]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues.
Findings
No blocking findings.
Summary
Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including docs/fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md.
Linter/static: workflow/static review evidence is bounded by the current-head GitHub Checks gate and changed-file evidence.
TDD/regression: coverage execution evidence and focused changed hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Coverage: coverage execution evidence reports supported repository test suites passed.
Docstring coverage: coverage execution evidence reports configured repository docstring gates passed or docstring coverage was advisory.
DAG: Change Flow DAG maps docs/fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md through bounded evidence, review risk, and required checks.
PoC/execution: coverage-evidence job executed on the current head and reported PASS.
DDD/domain: workflow and repository-governance invariants were reviewed against changed files in bounded evidence.
CDD/context: CodeGraph evidence, changed-file history, and focused hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Similar issues: changed-file history evidence was reviewed for comparable local precedents.
Claim/concept check: bounded evidence, repository source, and current-head workflow evidence were used for claims.
Standards search: standards and external-source checks are delegated to configured OpenCode web_search/Context7/DeepWiki sources when applicable; no evidence-backed standards blocker is present in bounded evidence.
Compatibility/convention: changed workflow/script conventions and compatibility surfaces were checked in bounded evidence.
Breaking-change/backcompat: deployment evidence and changed-file history were checked for backward-compatibility risk.
Performance: changed surfaces were checked for performance risk in bounded evidence.
Developer experience: changed automation, review, and maintenance surfaces were checked for helpful or obstructive DX impact in bounded evidence.
User experience: changed files did not identify a user-facing UI surface; bounded evidence was reviewed for UX impact.
Security/privacy: workflow-token, review-gate, and repository-automation security/privacy boundaries were checked in bounded evidence.
- Result: APPROVE
- Reason: No material issues found in the inspected files.
- Head SHA:
b1ddafced86302f461e95259699f1efde5ec87c9 - Workflow run: 28423448564
- Workflow attempt: 1
Change Flow DAG
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Docs: fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md"]
S2 --> I2["operator or user guidance"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Docs: fixed-parameter-item-calibration.md"]
R2 --> V2["docs review"]
Evidence --> S3["Test: test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R"]
S3 --> I3["regression suite"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: Test: test-fixed-parameter-calibration.R"]
R3 --> V3["targeted test run"]
1 participant
Summary
confirmCommonItems = TRUEsupport so non-interactive CI can run the common-item path without hanging onreadline()docs/fixed-parameter-item-calibration.mdReview requirements
This PR is intentionally queued before merging lower-number stale automation PRs that touch the package behavior, because
aFIPCneeds true-parameter reproduction evidence before further estimation changes are safe.The central review process should come from
ContextualWisdomLab/.githubrequired workflows: Strix, OpenCode Review, and PR Review Merge Scheduler. Please do not force-merge; wait for current-head approval and passing required checks.Testing
Rscriptmissing;rresolves to PowerShell history).Rscript -e "testthat::test_dir('tests/testthat')"or the repository R check workflow.Literature basis
mirt::fixedCalibdocumentation, which describes FPC based on Kim (2006).