junte/Model
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/Hestia-Homes/Model.git synced 2026-07-27 23:35:01 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Renumber the baseline-coherence ADR to 0066 🟪

Browse source 
ADR-0065 is claimed by Scenario Export on the open #1546; this branch is the
later of the two, so it moves.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Khalim Conn-Kowlessar 2026-07-21 16:38:49 +00:00
parent 735a3a1c8e
commit 29157811e0
2 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
CONTEXT.md
View file

@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ The SAP / EPC Band / carbon emissions / Primary Energy Intensity recorded on the
_Avoid_: original performance, raw EPC values, recorded baseline
**Effective Performance**:
The SAP / EPC Band / carbon emissions / Primary Energy Intensity the modelling pipeline actually scored against — equal to Lodged Performance when no Rebaselining trigger fires, replaced by **SAP10 Calculation** output (the deterministic `Sap10Calculator`, which superseded the old ML-API rebaseliner; an ML residual head over the calculator is future — ADR-0009/0013) when triggered. The half of Baseline Performance that says "what we modelled". **Modelling does not read it**: it re-scores the Effective EPC itself (it needs a continuous score and a `SapResult` to bill from, and ADR-0011 forbids an in-memory hand-off between stages), then **asserts** its re-score agrees with this persisted figure and logs an error when it does not. The two are deliberately *not* reconciled — a divergence means the stages scored different pictures, and anchoring the Plan's SAP to this integer would leave it disagreeing with its own carbon, energy and bill figures (ADR-0065). Because a Plan's `post_*` are read against this figure, an unchecked divergence surfaces to the user as a gain nobody modelled.
The SAP / EPC Band / carbon emissions / Primary Energy Intensity the modelling pipeline actually scored against — equal to Lodged Performance when no Rebaselining trigger fires, replaced by **SAP10 Calculation** output (the deterministic `Sap10Calculator`, which superseded the old ML-API rebaseliner; an ML residual head over the calculator is future — ADR-0009/0013) when triggered. The half of Baseline Performance that says "what we modelled". **Modelling does not read it**: it re-scores the Effective EPC itself (it needs a continuous score and a `SapResult` to bill from, and ADR-0011 forbids an in-memory hand-off between stages), then **asserts** its re-score agrees with this persisted figure and logs an error when it does not. The two are deliberately *not* reconciled — a divergence means the stages scored different pictures, and anchoring the Plan's SAP to this integer would leave it disagreeing with its own carbon, energy and bill figures (ADR-0066). Because a Plan's `post_*` are read against this figure, an unchecked divergence surfaces to the user as a gain nobody modelled.
_Avoid_: modelled performance, rebaselined performance (only correct when rebaselining ran), scored values
**Calculated SAP10 Performance**:

0
docs/adr/0065-modelling-asserts-baseline-coherence-rather-than-anchoring.md → docs/adr/0066-modelling-asserts-baseline-coherence-rather-than-anchoring.md
View file