The stripper tried to work out where the model's working ends and the
advice begins by classifying prose - marker words, hedging words,
length. It failed in BOTH directions, and the review caught both:
- it emptied legitimate advice (a 1,093-character reply containing one
hedging word and no marker phrase was reduced to ""), so the brewer
saw nothing at all; and
- it let the model's working through in full (a 1,053-character reply
with no hedging word was returned verbatim), so the brewer was shown
the model thinking about their beer.
Neither a marker list nor a length threshold is reliable. Prose is not
a format.
So the model is asked for the format instead. Its reply must have this
shape:
ADVICE:
<the advice itself>
Everything before the marker is working, everything from it on is the
advice. The split is exact, with no judgement calls.
Verified against the live model, four different brews:
Test Pale Ale marker@pos=0 finish=stop advice_len=656
Nocturna Christmas marker@pos=0 finish=stop advice_len=668
Ginger beer marker@pos=0 finish=stop advice_len=621
Cider raspberry marker@pos=0 finish=stop advice_len=539
All four start clean, with no marker left in the advice.
A reply with no marker is used as it stands - the safe direction, where
the brewer sees a slightly rambling reply rather than no advice at all.
An empty advice is now recorded as a FAILURE rather than stored as a
successful generation. Storing an empty string with advice_ok=True
made the page render "Thinking..." for ever, because the template's
`{% if reading.advice %}` was false - so the brewer never learned that
it had failed.
181 tests (up from 184 - the eight heuristic-era stripper tests are
replaced by six that test the marker behaviour).
hermes
75f94d47e2