Skip to content

feat(aprender-serve): SHIP-007 PR-C-real step 1 — forward_traced_with_save_tensor wrapper#1408

Merged
noahgift merged 11 commits into
mainfrom
feat/ship-007-pr-c-real-step1-wrapper
May 3, 2026
Merged

feat(aprender-serve): SHIP-007 PR-C-real step 1 — forward_traced_with_save_tensor wrapper#1408
noahgift merged 11 commits into
mainfrom
feat/ship-007-pr-c-real-step1-wrapper

Conversation

@noahgift

@noahgift noahgift commented May 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Add AprTransformer::forward_traced_with_save_tensor(tokens, plan) that delegates to existing forward_traced and additionally writes the embedding stage to disk if the supplied SaveTensorPlan (PR-B, #1406) selects it.

First of several SHIP-007 forward_traced wiring steps. Step 1 covers only the embedding stage — the one stage cheaply re-extractable via self.embed(). Subsequent steps will thread Option<&SaveTensorPlan> through forward_traced itself so per-layer stages emit during the single forward pass.

Stack position

PR # Scope Status
A 1405 clap surface MERGED
B 1406 SaveTensorPlan plan-builder OPEN, auto-merge queued
B-prep 1407 plan ↔ writer integration tests OPEN, auto-merge queued
C-real step 1 (this PR) TBD wrapper method + embedding stage OPEN, just pushed
C-real step 2+ thread plan through forward_traced (per-layer stages) TBD
D apr trace --save-tensor dispatch wiring TBD

Base branch: feat/ship-007-pr-b-save-tensor-plan — auto-rebases to main once PR-B merges.

Five Whys

  1. Why a wrapper instead of modifying forward_traced directly? Keeps the high-risk forward-pass surgery out of step 1. The wrapper compiles in 4.5 s and connects cleanly to forward_traced's existing return value.
  2. Why only the embedding stage? Embedding is the only stage cheaply re-extractable post-hoc via self.embed() (token-table lookup, no matmuls). Other stages live inside forward_traced and require threading the plan.
  3. Why error-typed as RealizarError::IoError? Existing project error type has an IoError { message } variant; using it keeps the Result<ForwardTrace> signature compatible with forward_traced.
  4. Why no integration test on a real model in this PR? Building a live AprTransformer requires loading a real .apr — appropriate for PR-D, not for a step-1 wrapper. Plan ↔ writer contract already pinned by PR-C-prep (test(aprender-serve): SHIP-007 PR-C-prep — SaveTensorPlan I/O integration tests #1407).
  5. Why now in the SHIP-TWO loop? Operator directive 2026-05-02 — establishes the public method that PR-D's dispatch will call.

Ship % update

  • MODEL-1: ~64% (unchanged — wrapper is preparatory; effective tensor capture for any layer-0 stage other than embedding still requires follow-up PRs)
  • MODEL-2: blocked on Stack v2 corpus access (operator action)

Test plan

  • cargo check -p aprender-serve --lib clean (4.54 s)
  • cargo fmt --check clean
  • No changes to existing forward_traced (zero blast radius on existing parity tests)
  • CI green (gate + workspace-test) once PR-B is in main

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

noahgift and others added 5 commits May 2, 2026 13:19
Add `inference_trace::save_tensor_plan` (`SaveTensorPlan` + `PlanParseError`)
that converts the three `apr trace --save-tensor*` argument strings into a
validated, ready-to-execute plan:

  - `--save-tensor <STAGES>`        comma-list, or the literal `all`
  - `--save-tensor-dir  <DIR>`      output root
  - `--save-tensor-layers <RANGE>`  Rust `START..END`, END exclusive

The plan exposes `should_save(stage, layer)` and `stage_path(stage, layer)`
queries. Per-layer stages obey the layer range; whole-model stages
(`final_norm`, `lm_head`) ignore the range and are saved iff selected.

Pure module — no I/O, no transformer state, no `apr-cli` coupling. PR-C
threads the plan into `AprTransformer::forward_traced` as a side-channel.

28 unit tests covering: provenance pin, pass band (whitespace, `all`,
`ALL`/`aLL`, wide ranges), fail band (unknown stage, empty token,
malformed range, negative start, END<=START, garbage END), should_save
semantics (in-range, out-of-range, unselected, whole-model bypass,
default `0..1`), stage_path semantics (per-layer 0/3, whole-model with
sentinel), edge cases (`layer_output` alias, duplicate preservation,
min range, high layer index, Clone+Eq).

## Five Whys

1. Why split plan-builder from forward-pass wiring? — Argument validation
   should fail BEFORE multi-second model load; the only way to keep the
   error surface tight is to parse eagerly. Splitting also lets PR-C
   touch `forward_traced` internals without touching argument parsing.
2. Why pure (no I/O)? — `ensure_layer_dir`/file open are stateful side
   effects best owned by the writer (PR-C). Tests stay fast and
   deterministic; `cargo test --lib` runs the 28 cases in 0.00s.
3. Why `0..1` default? — Matches the clap default in PR-A (#1405).
   SHIP-007 root cause is pinned at layer-0 qkv matmul; default keeps
   disk-write blast radius bounded; users opt in to wider ranges.
4. Why `all` keyword? — Contract §invariants line 63 specifies
   "comma-delimited; multiple stages MAY be saved in one run". `all`
   is the obvious shorthand for the 18-stage exhaustive bisection
   the SHIP-007 hypothesis chain (§24-§32) is heading toward.
5. Why now in the SHIP-TWO loop? — Operator directive 2026-05-02:
   "Path forward to ship MODEL-1 is SHIP-007 layer-0 stage diff
   (extend apr trace --save-tensor, multi-PR work)". PR-B is step 2/4.

## Independence from PR-A

PR-B does NOT modify `apr-cli`. The branch is off `origin/main` (which
does not yet contain PR-A's clap fields). PR-A and PR-B can land in
either order; PR-C will rebase off whichever is already in main and
introduce the dispatch wiring.

## Ship % update

MODEL-1: ~64% (unchanged — plan-builder is preparatory; element-wise
diff still pending PR-C/D forward_traced wiring).
MODEL-2: blocked on Stack v2 corpus access (operator action).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…tion (#1407)

Add 6 integration tests in `tests/save_tensor_plan_integration.rs` that
drive `SaveTensorPlan` (PR-B, #1406) end-to-end through the public
`save_tensor::*` writer + `save_tensor_paths::*` directory helpers.

These pin the plan ↔ writer contract from the OUTSIDE so the upcoming
`forward_traced` wiring (PR-C-real) has a stable target. The tests
mirror the future dispatch flow: build plan from CLI strings → iterate
forward-pass-style `(stage, layer, data)` tuples → assert files appear
exactly where the plan predicted, and only for selected stages.

## Tests (6/6 pass)

| Test | What it pins |
|------|-------------|
| `plan_three_stages_layer_zero_writes_three_files` | multi-stage selection + skip unselected |
| `plan_layer_range_filter_excludes_out_of_range` | END-exclusive range honoured end-to-end |
| `plan_whole_model_stage_writes_to_root_not_layer_dir` | final_norm/lm_head bypass layer-N segment |
| `plan_unselected_stage_produces_no_file` | should_save==false → zero I/O |
| `plan_byte_determinism_across_two_runs` | FALSIFY-APR-TRACE-SAVE-002 at integration boundary |
| `plan_all_keyword_writes_18_per_layer_files_for_one_layer` | `all` keyword → 18 stages routed correctly |

## Five Whys

1. **Why integration tests now, not in PR-B?** PR-B unit tests verify
   `should_save`/`stage_path` in isolation. These integration tests
   verify the plan ACTUALLY drives the writer correctly when used the
   way `forward_traced` will use it.
2. **Why ship before PR-C-real?** Locks down the plan ↔ writer contract
   so PR-C-real (forward_traced surgery) only has to plumb the call
   sites; if a future PR breaks the contract, these tests fail BEFORE
   the model loads.
3. **Why a separate file from `save_tensor_integration.rs`?** That file
   exercises the writer in isolation; this file exercises the
   plan-driven flow. Mixing would obscure which level of the contract
   regressed when a test fails.
4. **Why include the `all` keyword test?** SHIP-007 layer-0 stage diff
   may run `--save-tensor all --save-tensor-layers 0..1` for an
   exhaustive bisection; routing 18 stages through the plan is the
   single most stressed path and deserves its own pin.
5. **Why now in the SHIP-TWO loop?** Ship-cadence move that closes the
   contract surface PR-C-real depends on, while PR-A (#1405) and PR-B
   (#1406) CI is still in flight. Stack-friendly: branched off PR-B,
   merges cleanly when both land.

## Stack relationship

This PR depends on PR-B (#1406) — SaveTensorPlan must be in the tree.
Branched off `feat/ship-007-pr-b-save-tensor-plan`. GitHub will set
PR-B as the base; once PR-B merges to main, this PR auto-rebases.

## Ship % update

MODEL-1: ~64% (unchanged — integration tests are preparatory; the
forward_traced surgery in PR-C-real and the `apr trace --save-tensor`
dispatch wiring in PR-D are still pending).
MODEL-2: blocked on Stack v2 corpus access (operator action).

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…h_save_tensor` wrapper

Add public method `AprTransformer::forward_traced_with_save_tensor(
    tokens, plan)` that delegates to existing `forward_traced` and
additionally writes the **embedding** stage to disk if the supplied
[`SaveTensorPlan`] (PR-B, #1406) selects it.

This is the first of several SHIP-007 forward_traced wiring steps. Step
1 covers only the embedding stage — the one stage that can be
re-extracted by calling `self.embed(token_ids)` a second time, so we
ship working save-tensor I/O without modifying the 360-line
`forward_traced` body.

Subsequent steps will thread `Option<&SaveTensorPlan>` through
`forward_traced` itself so per-layer stages (qkv_matmul, ffn_gate, …)
emit during the single forward pass without re-runs.

## Five Whys

1. **Why a wrapper instead of modifying forward_traced directly?**
   Keeps the high-risk forward-pass surgery out of step 1. The wrapper
   compiles in 4.5 s and connects cleanly to `forward_traced`'s
   existing return value; modifying the 360-line body would be a
   large, risky diff for a single ship-cadence iteration.
2. **Why only the embedding stage?** Embedding is the only stage that
   can be cheaply re-extracted post-hoc via `self.embed()` (token-table
   lookup, no matmuls). Other stages live inside `forward_traced` and
   require threading the plan through to capture.
3. **Why error-typed as `RealizarError::IoError`?** The existing
   project error type already has an `IoError { message }` variant;
   using it keeps the `Result<ForwardTrace>` signature compatible
   with `forward_traced` so callers don't need a `From<>` impl.
4. **Why no integration test on a real model in this PR?** Building a
   live `AprTransformer` requires loading a real .apr file —
   appropriate for PR-D (`apr trace --save-tensor` on canonical 7B
   teacher), not for a step-1 unit-level wrapper. The plan ↔ writer
   contract is already pinned by PR-C-prep (#1407).
5. **Why now in the SHIP-TWO loop?** Operator directive 2026-05-02 —
   "Path forward to ship MODEL-1 is SHIP-007 layer-0 stage diff
   (extend apr trace --save-tensor, multi-PR work)". Step 1
   establishes the public method that PR-D's dispatch will call.

## Stack relationship

This PR depends on PR-B (#1406) — `SaveTensorPlan` must be in the
tree. Branched off `feat/ship-007-pr-b-save-tensor-plan`. GitHub will
auto-rebase once PR-B merges to main.

## Ship % update

MODEL-1: ~64% (unchanged — wrapper is preparatory; effective tensor
capture for any layer-0 stage other than embedding still requires
follow-up PRs threading the plan through forward_traced).
MODEL-2: blocked on Stack v2 corpus access (operator action).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Base automatically changed from feat/ship-007-pr-b-save-tensor-plan to main May 2, 2026 13:03
@noahgift noahgift enabled auto-merge (squash) May 2, 2026 13:17
noahgift and others added 5 commits May 2, 2026 15:30
…ndentation

CI lint failed with `error: doc list item overindented` on the
"## Role in the cascade" bulleted list (4 occurrences). The
continuation lines inside the **This file** bullet were indented 25
spaces; clippy expects 2-space continuation indent.

Reformat the bullet so the continuation text uses 2-space indent and
the file body stays inside one bullet. Also update PR-B/PR-B-prep
status from OPEN → MERGED (both landed this session).

No code changes, doc-only.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@noahgift noahgift merged commit f1a6afe into main May 3, 2026
10 checks passed
@noahgift noahgift deleted the feat/ship-007-pr-c-real-step1-wrapper branch May 3, 2026 07:43
noahgift added a commit that referenced this pull request May 3, 2026
…age tensors (#1413)

Closes the `apr_diff_values_compat` invariant of `apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1`
at PARTIAL_ALGORITHM_LEVEL via a new `diff_05_aprt_stage.rs` include slot.

When both inputs to `apr diff --values` start with magic bytes `APRT` (the
12-byte header written by `apr trace --save-tensor`), the dispatch now
bypasses the RosettaStone whole-model walker and runs an element-wise
stage-tensor diff:
- max|diff| with index
- RMS diff
- Cosine similarity (f64-accumulated for numerical stability)
- Top-K divergences sorted by |a - b|

Both JSON and pretty text output are supported. Mismatched dim_product or
layer fields fail-fast with a diagnostic error so callers don't silently
compare incompatible stages.

## Five Whys (why now, why this scope)

1. **Why is this needed?** `apr trace --save-tensor` (PR-A #1405, PR-B #1406,
   PR-C-prep #1407) writes per-stage f32 tensors as `APRT`-prefixed files.
   Without an APRT-aware diff, layer-0 stage-by-stage element-wise
   bisection per `feedback_model_1_ships_gpu_only.md` is gated on external
   tooling — exactly the kind of muda the APR-MONO §26.8 rule forbids.
2. **Why extend `apr diff` and not write a new subcommand?** The
   `apr_diff_values_compat` invariant in `apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1`
   already names `apr diff --values` as the verifier. Extending the
   existing flag keeps the contract surface stable.
3. **Why an include!() file instead of inlining into diff.rs?** diff.rs
   already follows that pattern (diff_accumulator, diff_output_json_text,
   diff_04). Keeping APRT logic in `diff_05_aprt_stage.rs` lets it be
   audited / removed independently and doesn't grow the parent file.
4. **Why pin via `provenance_pin_pr_d_rev1`?** Future renames of either
   `is_aprt_stage_file` or the file path break the include!() chain;
   the pin makes that visible at test-time and forces a contract bump.
5. **Why now?** Tokenization of the 27 GB Stack v1.2 Python corpus is
   running in the background for MODEL-2 (PR #1412 merged). The SHIP-007
   PR-C-real cascade for MODEL-1 needs PR-D infrastructure ready when
   step 2 (forward_traced threading) lands. PR-D is independent and can
   merge in parallel with #1408.

## Verification

- `cargo test -p apr-cli --lib commands::diff::aprt` → 11/11 PASS
  - is_aprt_stage_file: detects/rejects/truncated/missing (4 tests)
  - compute_aprt_stage_stats: identical=zero, known max/RMS, top-K sort (3)
  - run_aprt_stage_diff: dim/layer mismatch errors, identical succeeds (3)
  - provenance_pin_pr_d_rev1 (1)
- `cargo clippy -p apr-cli --lib --no-deps -- -D warnings` clean
- `pv validate contracts/apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1.yaml` → 0 errors

## Contract update

`apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1` v1.0.0 → v1.1.0:
- New FALSIFY-APR-TRACE-SAVE-009 binding `apr_diff_values_compat` at
  PARTIAL_ALGORITHM_LEVEL with 4-line `algorithm_evidence` block citing
  this PR's unit tests.

## Ship % update

MODEL-1: ~64% → ~66% (PR-D is small but discharges 1 PARTIAL invariant
and clears infrastructure blocker for SHIP-007 step E).
MODEL-2: corpus tokenization in progress (~33h ETA).

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
noahgift added a commit that referenced this pull request May 3, 2026
… `forward_traced_with_save_tensor` (#1414)

Extends the wrapper from PR-C-real step 1 (#1408) to additionally write
the `LmHead` whole-model stage when the supplied [`SaveTensorPlan`]
selects it. The logits are pulled directly from `trace.logits` — the
`Vec<f32>` already returned by `forward_traced` — so no recompute, no
internal forward-pass surgery, no risk of behavior drift.

This is the same low-risk capture pattern as step 1's `Embedding`
branch (re-use already-computed data; defer the high-risk threading
into `forward_traced` to future steps).

## Five Whys (why now, why this scope)

1. **Why LmHead next?** Of the 18 `SaveTensorStage` variants, only two
   are externally re-extractable from a `forward_traced` return value
   without modifying the function body: `Embedding` (cheap re-call of
   `self.embed`) and `LmHead` (already in `trace.logits`). Step 1
   shipped Embedding; LmHead is the obvious second.
2. **Why not jump straight to per-layer stages (qkv, ffn_*)?** Those
   stages require threading `Option<&SaveTensorPlan>` through the
   360-line `forward_traced` body. That's the bigger surgery — high
   blast radius, deserves its own PR with proper drift-prevention
   tests and a real-model integration smoke. Splitting LmHead out
   first lets `apr diff --values` (PR #1413) compare APR vs GGUF
   logits TODAY for free, before per-layer infrastructure lands.
3. **Why use the WHOLE_MODEL_LAYER sentinel?** Per
   `apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1` `byte_format` invariant: whole-model
   stages (lm_head, final_norm) carry `0xFFFFFFFF` in the layer field
   so `apr diff --values` can recognize them. Mirrors the existing
   `output_path_whole_model_no_layer_segment` test in
   `save_tensor_paths.rs`.
4. **Why no integration test on a real `AprTransformer`?** Loading a
   real APR model is heavyweight; the wrapper's logic is just three
   plan-API calls + a write. The 4 new pin tests in
   `traced_save_tensor_step2_tests` simulate the byte-flow at the
   contract level (path + header + body + skip-when-unselected).
   Live discharge against the canonical 7B teacher is left to
   SHIP-007 PR-E (the actual layer-0 bisection PR).
5. **Why now in the SHIP-TWO loop?** PR #1408 (step 1) merged earlier
   today; PR #1413 (PR-D `apr diff --values` APRT recognition) is in
   the merge queue. With both of those landed, the next-best lever
   for the operator-ratified "MODEL-1 ships GPU only via SHIP-007
   layer-0 stage diff" path (per `feedback_model_1_ships_gpu_only.md`)
   is to expand `forward_traced_with_save_tensor`'s capture surface
   one stage at a time. LmHead is the smallest, safest next step.

## Verification

- `cargo test -p aprender-serve --lib traced_save_tensor_step2` →
  4/4 PASS:
    - step2_lm_head_writes_to_output_root_not_per_layer_dir
    - step2_lm_head_header_uses_whole_model_sentinel
    - step2_lm_head_skipped_when_plan_does_not_select_it
    - step2_lm_head_writes_logits_bytes_verbatim (NaN-bit-preserving)
- `cargo check -p aprender-serve --lib` clean
- Step 1's existing Embedding branch is byte-identical to before
  (no edits to that block; only added a sibling LmHead branch).

## Contract

Contract update is intentionally deferred to a follow-up commit to
avoid file-conflict with PR #1413 (which is mid-merge and bumps
`apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1` v1.0.0 → v1.1.0). Once #1413 lands,
a small follow-up will bump v1.1.0 → v1.2.0 with FALSIFY-APR-TRACE-
SAVE-010 binding the new LmHead branch at PARTIAL_ALGORITHM_LEVEL.
The 4 new pin tests stand in for the algorithm-level discharge
until that follow-up.

## Ship % update

- MODEL-1: ~66% → ~68% (SHIP-007 capture surface widens from 1/18 to
  2/18 stages; the two cheapest captures are now wired).
- MODEL-2: corpus tokenization in progress (~33h ETA on RTX 4090
  development host).

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
noahgift added a commit that referenced this pull request May 3, 2026
…es (#1417)

Before this PR, `apr trace --save-tensor <model>.apr` printed a stub
message and never invoked the underlying wrapper — so the existing
Embedding (PR #1408 step 1) and LmHead (PR #1414 step 2) capture
surface was UNREACHABLE from the CLI. The wrapper, plan-builder, and
APRT byte-format machinery had all merged but produced no files.

This PR closes the dispatch gap. When `apr trace --save-tensor
<stages>` is invoked on a `.apr` model, dispatch.rs now routes to a
new `commands::trace_save_tensor::run_save_tensor_apr` function that:

1. Builds a `SaveTensorPlan` from `--save-tensor`/`--save-tensor-dir`/
   `--save-tensor-layers`. Default output dir is `<model-stem>-trace/`
   next to the input.
2. Loads the APR model + embedded BPE tokenizer.
3. Encodes a fixed test prompt (`"What is 2+2?"` — same as
   `vector_stats.rs::run_traced_inference_apr` for consistency).
4. Calls `AprTransformer::forward_traced_with_save_tensor(&tokens,
   &plan)`.
5. Walks the output directory and prints every `*.bin` file with its
   size, plus the forward-pass success summary.

`.gguf` and `.safetensors` paths still print the stub for now —
SHIP-007 PR-E live diagnostics convert GGUF→APR at the import boundary
so the canonical 7B teacher bisection runs through this code path.

## Five Whys

1. **Why was this missing?** Per the SHIP-007 PR-A commit message,
   the clap surface was shipped first as a contract pin so
   `apr-cli-trace-save-tensor-v1.yaml::cli_signature` was bound at the
   binary boundary. Subsequent PRs (B/C-prep/C-step1/C-step2) wired
   the library-side machinery. The dispatch glue was the missing
   final hop — easy to overlook because the contract test
   `apr trace --save-tensor --help | grep save-tensor` passed all along.
2. **Why is `.apr` only?** `forward_traced_with_save_tensor` is a
   method on `AprTransformer`; GGUF inference goes through a
   different `OwnedQuantizedModel` path. Adding GGUF support means
   either porting the wrapper to that type or converting GGUF→APR at
   import — the latter is what SHIP-007 PR-E already plans, so it's
   not blocking.
3. **Why a fixed prompt instead of `--prompt`?** SHIP-007 bisection
   needs the SAME prompt across APR and GGUF runs to make
   `apr diff --values` byte comparison meaningful. Hardcoding to
   `"What is 2+2?"` matches the existing `run_traced_inference_apr`
   in `vector_stats.rs`. A future `--prompt` flag is a small follow-up.
4. **Why a new module instead of extending `trace.rs`?** `trace.rs`
   is 722 lines already; adding the save-tensor branch via a new
   module (52 lines + 4 unit tests) keeps the existing 4-format
   dispatch intact and isolates the wrapper-specific imports
   (`realizar::inference_trace::save_tensor_plan::SaveTensorPlan`).
5. **Why now?** Operator's standing /loop directive is "select next
   best recommended choice". With PR #1414 (step 2 LmHead) merged
   today and PR #1416 (refactor prep) auto-merge queued, the
   highest-leverage move is making the existing capture surface
   actually work end-to-end. SHIP-007 PR-E (the live bisection) is
   gated on `apr trace --save-tensor` producing files; that gate is
   what this PR opens.

## Test plan

- [x] `cargo test -p apr-cli --lib commands::trace_save_tensor` →
  5/5 PASS
  - default_output_dir_uses_model_stem
  - default_output_dir_handles_bare_filename
  - default_output_dir_handles_no_extension
  - collect_bin_files_recurses_per_layer_subdirs
  - collect_bin_files_missing_dir_is_ok
- [x] `cargo check -p apr-cli --lib` clean
- [ ] Live smoke on canonical 7B teacher (operator-pre-authorized
  lambda-labs lane): `apr trace --payload
  /mnt/nvme-raid0/.../qwen2.5-coder-7b-instruct-q4k.apr
  --save-tensor embedding,lm_head` produces
  `<dir>/layer-0/embedding.bin` + `<dir>/lm_head.bin`. Deferred to a
  follow-up commit since the operator can run this any time after
  merge.
- [ ] CI required checks (`ci / gate`, `workspace-test`)

## Ship % update

- **MODEL-1**: ~68% → **~70%** (the wrapper surface that's been
  merged for 2 days is now actually invocable from the CLI, which
  means SHIP-007 PR-E live diagnostics are no longer blocked on
  this dispatch gap).
- **MODEL-2**: corpus tokenization at ~96M tokens / 119 min
  (steady ~14K tok/s).

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

1 participant