AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Ml Feedback Ladder

skill-pengzhangzhi-superpowers-ml-ml-feedback-ladder · by pengzhangzhi

Use when planning how to verify an ML experiment cheaply before expensive runs - design the R0-R7 ladder from local sanity checks to full study, with promotion/stop criteria.

No reviews yet
0 installs
29 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-pengzhangzhi-superpowers-ml-ml-feedback-ladder

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-pengzhangzhi-superpowers-ml-ml-feedback-ladder)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
2mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Ml Feedback Ladder? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

ML Feedback Ladder

Overview

In normal software, a passing test suite can mean the code works. In ML research, passing tests only show the code PATH might run - they do NOT show the method works. You need STAGED EMPIRICAL verification, ordered cheapest-to-expensive, where every cheap check GATES the expensive cluster/GPU jobs below it.

This skill OWNS the canonical ladder. Design the rungs for ONE specific experiment with your human partner before launching anything.

Core principle: Cheap checks gate expensive jobs. Never spend a slow rung to find a bug a fast rung would have caught.

Upstream: the experiment, metric, and protocol come from superpowers-ml:ml-experiment-design. Downstream: the ladder you design here becomes verification steps in superpowers-ml:writing-plans, and the final rung hands off to superpowers-ml:ml-result-review.

The Ladder

Each rung names what it CHECKS, the ARTIFACT that proves it passed, and rough COST. Cost is relative - a rung is "expensive" if it consumes a scheduled GPU/cluster job.

| Rung | Checks | Proof artifact | Cost | |------|--------|----------------|------| | R0 | Experiment card / protocol defined: question, locked primary metric, baseline, decision rule | The experiment card itself | minutes, no compute | | R1 | Code / import / config / static sanity: it imports, config parses, paths resolve, seeds set | Clean import + config dump + linter | seconds, dev node | | R2 | Shape / dtype / device / one-batch forward+backward: loss is finite, gradients flow | Logged shapes/dtypes/device + one non-NaN loss + non-zero grads | seconds-minutes, dev node | | R3 | Tiny overfit: a handful of examples driven to ~zero loss (or memorized) | Loss curve collapsing to near-zero on the tiny set | minutes, dev node / 1 GPU | | R4 | Real launcher smoke run: the ACTUAL launch path (local GPU or cluster smoke job) starts, checkpoints, logs, resumes - on tiny data/steps | Launcher exits 0, checkpoint written, logs/metrics emitted | one short job | | R5 | Short pilot / early signal: real data, real config, truncated budget; metric is moving the right way and is stable | Early metric curve vs. baseline on the locked metric | a fraction of a full run | | R6 | Full run / full study: the locked protocol at full budget, seeds/sweeps as specified | Complete metrics across all planned seeds/conditions | the expensive job(s) | | R7 | Result review / decision memo: compare to baseline under the locked primary metric, decide | Decision memo (handed to superpowers-ml:ml-result-review) | analysis time |

R0-R3 should run on your dev node in well under an hour. R4+ consume scheduled jobs - protect them.

Promotion and Stop Criteria

State the gate between EACH adjacent rung before you launch. A rung promotes ONLY when its proof artifact exists and is green.

  • R0 -> R1: card has a single locked primary metric and an explicit decision rule. No metric, no launch.
  • R1 -> R2: imports clean, config parses, paths/seeds resolved.
  • R2 -> R3: one batch forward+backward, loss finite, gradients non-zero on the right devices.
  • R3 -> R4: tiny set overfits. If it CANNOT overfit a handful of examples, the model/loss/data wiring is broken - fix before any GPU job.
  • R4 -> R5: real launcher runs end-to-end on tiny budget, checkpoints, resumes, logs the metric.
  • R5 -> R6: early signal is stable and not obviously worse than baseline. Promote to the expensive full run only here.
  • R6 -> R7: all planned seeds/conditions complete; metrics intact, no silent failures.

STOP rule at every rung: if the proof artifact is missing or red, do NOT spend the next rung. Fix the cheap thing first.

Policy

State these plainly and hold to them:

  • A cheap rung PASSING is a PRECONDITION, not proof of final success. R3 overfitting tells you the plumbing works; it tells you NOTHING about whether the method beats the baseline.
  • A cheap rung FAILING means do NOT spend the expensive rung. Diagnose and fix at the lowest rung that reproduces the problem.
  • Early signal (R5) may REJECT an obviously bad run - kill it, save the budget. Early signal must NOT claim victory. Only R6/R7 under the locked primary metric can support a "beats baseline" claim.
  • Never skip a rung to "save time." A skipped fast rung is paid back as a burned slow job.

Scheduler-Agnostic

The launcher at R4+ is whatever your cluster uses. Slurm is ONE example (e.g. a small sbatch smoke job), not an assumption - the ladder is identical for a bare torchrun, a Ray/Kubernetes submission, or a plain SSH-to-GPU script. Design the rungs around YOUR launch path; do not hard-code a scheduler.

Reporting

Report progress as the highest GREEN rung, and separate what is supported from what is not:

Verified through R3 (tiny overfit). Not yet verified by smoke run, pilot, or full study.

Never report a method as beating a baseline without R6 (or an equivalent full evaluation) under the locked primary metric.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.