Skip to content

Add exact robust-code constructions and residual precision (CAP0-03, SLM-79)#327

Merged
Tyler-R-Kendrick merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
slm-79-cap0-03-coding
Jul 18, 2026
Merged

Add exact robust-code constructions and residual precision (CAP0-03, SLM-79)#327
Tyler-R-Kendrick merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
slm-79-cap0-03-coding

Conversation

@Tyler-R-Kendrick

@Tyler-R-Kendrick Tyler-R-Kendrick commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

CAP0-03 (SLM-79): exact robust-code constructions and residual precision

Adds torch-free coding-theory utilities to the arity analysis package.

What's here (7 files, +708/−0, on current main)

  • arity/coding.py — exact robust-code constructions: Hamming / Singleton / GV bounds, verify_code, MDS + shortened ternary-Hamming. smallest_injective_arity delegates to main's canonical report.min_alphabet_for_capacity (exact integer K^d search) — a single source of truth for capacity.
  • arity/precision.py — residual precision (trit-planes / ECOC).
  • arity/suggest.py — arity suggestions (imports only coding.py).
  • arity/__init__.py — additive CAP0-03 re-exports; canonical exports and modules untouched, never imports the retired stub.
  • 16 tests + a dated design doc.

Scope

The coding/precision/suggest modules are self-contained (stdlib only) — not coupled to the deleted arity stub. Deferred as out-of-scope: the source branch's report.py CodingMetadata / ArityReport contract, the analyzer.py stub, and the --include-coding-metadata flag — all targeting the retired stub (#323), not main's canonical arity package (#354).

Verification (torch-free)

  • Canonical arity no-regression: test_arity_analysis.py 21 passed (unchanged); canonical files byte-identical; stub absent.
  • New test_arity_coding + test_arity_suggest: 16 passed. ruff / repo_policy / diff-check clean.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@vercel

vercel Bot commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
slm-training Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 18, 2026 8:40am

Request Review

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@Tyler-R-Kendrick, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 36 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 7732052b-5990-4057-b647-1cf5b6d2d9db

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c4c2b6b and 71e9175.

📒 Files selected for processing (7)
  • docs/design/cap0-03-coding-precision-20260718.md
  • src/slm_training/dsl/analysis/arity/__init__.py
  • src/slm_training/dsl/analysis/arity/coding.py
  • src/slm_training/dsl/analysis/arity/precision.py
  • src/slm_training/dsl/analysis/arity/suggest.py
  • tests/test_dsl/test_arity_coding.py
  • tests/test_dsl/test_arity_suggest.py
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch slm-79-cap0-03-coding

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

…SLM-79)

Torch-free coding-theory utilities for arity analysis: exact robust-code
constructions (Hamming/Singleton/GV bounds, MDS + shortened ternary-Hamming),
residual precision (trit-planes/ECOC), and arity suggestions.
smallest_injective_arity delegates to main's canonical
report.min_alphabet_for_capacity (exact integer K^d search) — a single source
of truth for capacity. Additive package exports; the canonical arity package
(canonical/minimize/report/state_graph) is untouched.

- arity/{coding,precision,suggest}.py + 16 tests + design doc.
- Deferred as out-of-scope: the report CodingMetadata/ArityReport contract and
  the analyzer stub the source branch also carried (those targeted the retired
  arity stub #323, not main's canonical ExactArityReport from #354).

Canonical arity no-regression: test_arity_analysis 21 passed unchanged.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017NWyjZwGMUPHXZhtqQVzUJ
@Tyler-R-Kendrick Tyler-R-Kendrick changed the title CAP0-03: Exact robust-code constructions and residual-precision reference functions (SLM-79) Add exact robust-code constructions and residual precision (CAP0-03, SLM-79) Jul 18, 2026
@Tyler-R-Kendrick
Tyler-R-Kendrick merged commit 88e6193 into main Jul 18, 2026
4 checks passed
@Tyler-R-Kendrick
Tyler-R-Kendrick deleted the slm-79-cap0-03-coding branch July 18, 2026 08:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants