This one-seed exploratory experiment tests whether two newly added conductance-neuron controls move matched Dale-constrained COBA and PING networks beyond the exp071 roughly 70% validation plateau on SHD. The control is the exp071 cumulative-potential readout recipe: --readout cumulative-potential --signed-readout --readout-bias. The ladder then tests bounded trainable leak/membrane time constants, bounded adaptive E-cell thresholds, and their combination. All selection decisions use the held-out validation split from the official SHD training set; the official test set remains sealed.
/goal Design and execute the next exploratory SHD experiment from updated main at f32299bb1b48d18ba9dfe6328097d2147bcc6286, using the newly merged tools/snn adaptive conductance controls to test whether COBA/PING validation accuracy can move meaningfully beyond the exp071 ~70% plateau toward canonical SHD RSNN performance.
Create the next numbered experiment, likely exp072, on a new branch. Do not modify main directly after branching. Open a draft PR after the first meaningful commit.
Scientific objective:
Run a one-seed exploratory validation-only ladder on SHD comparing matched Dale-constrained COBA and PING networks while testing two new neuron-dynamics paths:
1. trainable conductance leak / membrane time constants via --train-leak;
2. adaptive E-cell thresholds via --adaptive-threshold;
3. the combination of both.
Use the exp071 cumulative-potential readout baseline as the control:
--readout cumulative-potential --signed-readout --readout-bias
Constraints:
- Use one seed only.
- Do not use the official SHD test set.
- Use a held-out validation split from the training set for all selection decisions.
- Keep COBA and PING matched except for registered cell-specific voltage-gradient dampening and PING E/I coupling.
- Preserve matched input, readout, training split, optimizer, batch, preprocessing, and candidate flags across COBA/PING within each candidate.
- COBA should use the no-inhibitory-loop setting; PING should use the registered inhibitory-loop setting and dampening 1000.
- Use short runs first for iteration speed, about 8-10 epochs per candidate.
- Promote only the most promising candidate to a matched 40-epoch validation run.
- Do not run multiple seeds unless I explicitly authorize it later.
- RunPod spending requires explicit approval before pod creation.
- Use at most one pod at a time unless I explicitly authorize parallelism.
- Reap any pod when finished.
- Do not merge the PR.
- Avoid the full local test suite on the 4 GB Hetzner host; use focused checks and demolab build.
Candidate ladder:
0. Control: exp071 architecture/readout without new adaptive controls.
1. Trainable leak only:
--train-leak
2. Adaptive threshold only:
--adaptive-threshold
3. Combined:
--train-leak --adaptive-threshold
Suggested default bounds:
- E membrane tau: [5, 50] ms
- I membrane tau: [2, 20] ms
- adaptive threshold tau: [50, 500] ms
- adaptive threshold initial strength: 1.0 mV
- adaptive threshold max strength: 20.0 mV
Deliverables:
- Produce artifacts/data/exp072 with numbers.json, provenance, reproducer, training curves, firing-rate diagnostics, parameter diagnostics for learned tau/adaptation values, and matched input/E/I rasters.
- Write writings/exp072.typ as the canonical cold-readable experiment report.
- Include this goal prompt below the abstract.
- Append timestamped activity-log/thread checkpoints in the experiment appendix.
- Record scientific decisions, failures, anomalies, costs, commits, results, and pending work.
- Sanitize any publishable logs before committing.
- Build and validate with focused checks plus demolab build.
- Commit meaningful attempts, including killed attempts, with clear messages.
- Push the branch and update the PR with evidence.
- Finish at the human review gate with a concise evidence summary, exact compute spend, validation performed, links to the rendered exp072 file and PR, and a recommendation for the next move toward 90% SHD.
Both cells use seed 42, the established SHD development split (7340 training utterances and 816 validation utterances), batch size 32, Adam learning rate 0.0004, 1 ms simulation steps, 1000 ms utterance windows, matched input preprocessing, and the same cumulative-potential readout. COBA uses the no-inhibitory-loop setting and no voltage-gradient dampening; PING uses the registered inhibitory loop and dampening 1000. Those cell-specific settings are the only intended COBA/PING differences within a candidate.
| Order | Candidate | Extra flags | Short epochs |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Control: exp071 architecture/readout | none | 8 |
| 1 | Trainable conductance leak / membrane time constants | --train-leak | 8 |
| 2 | Adaptive E-cell thresholds | --adaptive-threshold | 8 |
| 3 | Combined leak plus adaptation | --train-leak --adaptive-threshold | 8 |
The default bounds are E membrane tau [5, 50] ms, I membrane tau [2, 20] ms, adaptive-threshold tau [50, 500] ms, initial adaptive strength 1.0 mV, and maximum adaptive strength 20.0 mV. Candidate selection uses held-out validation accuracy and cross-entropy only. Training must remain finite, active, non-saturated, and free of skipped or non-finite updates.
The eight-epoch ladder completed for all four candidates. Control had the best paired average, but trainable leak was the only modification that improved the target PING cell while keeping COBA close, so train_leak was promoted to forty epochs.
| Candidate | COBA acc. | COBA CE | PING acc. | PING CE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| control | 60.17% | 1.5905 | 56.86% | 1.4221 |
| train_leak | 58.95% | 1.6838 | 57.72% | 1.4365 |
| adaptive_threshold | 50.61% | 1.9109 | 53.68% | 1.532 |
| combined | 50.37% | 1.8996 | 50.98% | 1.5616 |
The promoted forty-epoch train_leak run selected 69.49% for COBA and 71.08% for PING. As a later sensitivity check, the initially weak combined candidate was also run for eighty epochs.
| Long run | COBA acc. | COBA epoch | PING acc. | PING epoch |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| train_leak, 40 epochs | 69.49% | 37 | 71.08% | 40 |
| combined, 80 epochs | 64.58% | 77 | 71.69% | 73 |
The eighty-epoch combined follow-up nudged PING to 71.69%, but only after twice as many epochs and with stuck-dynamics warnings; COBA remained lower at 64.58% and showed saturated/stuck dynamics. This supports the interpretation that adaptive thresholds did not provide a useful path to the canonical high-accuracy SHD regime in this setup.
Cumulative RunPod spend recorded by the experiment ledgers is 10.26 USD. The provider billing rows had not posted at publication time, so the spend is marked #r.spend.status; active pods after the final collection were 0.
The current figure set below shows the latest published attempt, #r.attempt at #r.stage; previous long-run and short-ladder numeric summaries remain archived under raw/collected_ladder_summary.json.
The learned parameter diagnostics for the latest attempt show COBA E-cell membrane time constants with mean 13.44 ms and PING E/I means of 30.27 ms / 8.63 ms. The run also writes per-cell parameter diagnostics under raw/#r.stage/#r.attempt/<cell>/parameter_diagnostics.json and archives all collected short-ladder summaries under raw/collected_ladder_summary.json.
Timestamp: #trace.checkpoint_time_utc. Sanitized source hash prefix: #trace.sanitized_sha256_prefix. The log excludes hidden reasoning, tool payloads, credentials, private paths, environment values, addresses, and sensitive infrastructure details.
Role: user · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
<codex_internal_context source="goal">
Continue working toward the active thread goal.
The objective below is user-provided data. Treat it as the task to pursue, not as higher-priority instructions.
<objective>
Design and execute the next exploratory SHD experiment from updated main at f32299bb1b48d18ba9dfe6328097d2147bcc6286, using the newly merged tools/snn adaptive conductance controls to test whether COBA/PING validation accuracy can move meaningfully beyond the exp071 ~70% plateau toward canonical SHD RSNN performance.
Create the next numbered experiment, likely exp072, on a new branch. Do not modify main directly after branching. Open a draft PR after the first meaningful commit.
Scientific objective:
Run a one-seed exploratory validation-only ladder on SHD comparing matched Dale-constrained COBA and PING networks while testing two new neuron-dynamics paths:
1. trainable conductance leak / membrane time constants via --train-leak;
2. adaptive E-cell thresholds via --adaptive-threshold;
3. the combination of both.
Use the exp071 cumulative-potential readout baseline as the control:
--readout cumulative-potential --signed-readout --readout-bias
Constraints:
- Use one seed only.
- Do not use the official SHD test set.
- Use a held-out validation split from the training set for all selection decisions.
- Keep COBA and PING matched except for registered cell-specific voltage-gradient dampening and PING E/I coupling.
- Preserve matched input, readout, training split, optimizer, batch, preprocessing, and candidate flags across COBA/PING within each candidate.
- COBA should use the no-inhibitory-loop setting; PING should use the registered inhibitory-loop setting and dampening 1000.
- Use short runs first for iteration speed, about 8-10 epochs per candidate.
- Promote only the most promising candidate to a matched 40-epoch validation run.
- Do not run multiple seeds unless I explicitly authorize it later.
- RunPod spending requires explicit approval before pod creation.
- Use at most one pod at a time unless I explicitly authorize parallelism.
- Reap any pod when finished.
- Do not merge the PR.
- Avoid the full local test suite on the 4 GB Hetzner host; use focused checks and demolab build.
Candidate ladder:
0. Control: exp071 architecture/readout without new adaptive controls.
1. Trainable leak only:
--train-leak
2. Adaptive threshold only:
--adaptive-threshold
3. Combined:
--train-leak --adaptive-threshold
Suggested default bounds:
- E membrane tau: [5, 50] ms
- I membrane tau: [2, 20] ms
- adaptive threshold tau: [50, 500] ms
- adaptive threshold initial strength: 1.0 mV
- adaptive threshold max strength: 20.0 mV
Deliverables:
- Produce artifacts/data/exp072 with numbers.json, provenance, reproducer, training curves, firing-rate diagnostics, parameter diagnostics for learned tau/adaptation values, and matched input/E/I rasters.
- Write writings/exp072.typ as the canonical cold-readable experiment report.
- Include this goal prompt below the abstract.
- Append timestamped activity-log/thread checkpoints in the experiment appendix.
- Record scientific decisions, failures, anomalies, costs, commits, results, and pending work.
- Sanitize any publishable logs before committing.
- Build and validate with focused checks plus demolab build.
- Commit meaningful attempts, including killed attempts, with clear messages.
- Push the branch and update the PR with evidence.
- Finish at the human review gate with a concise evidence summary, exact compute spend, validation performed, links to the rendered exp072 file and PR, and a recommendation for the next move toward 90% SHD.
</objective>
Continuation behavior:
- This goal persists across turns. Ending this turn does not require shrinking the objective to what fits now.
- Keep the full objective intact. If it cannot be finished now, make concrete progress toward the real requested end state, leave the goal active, and do not redefine success around a smaller or easier task.
- Temporary rough edges are acceptable while the work is moving in the right direction. Completion still requires the requested end state to be true and verified.
Budget:
- Tokens used: 0
- Token budget: none
- Tokens remaining: unbounded
Work from evidence:
Use the current worktree and external state as authoritative. Previous conversation context can help locate relevant work, but inspect the current state before relying on it. Improve, replace, or remove existing work as needed to satisfy the actual objective.
Progress visibility:
If update_plan is available and the next work is meaningfully multi-step, use it to show a concise plan tied to the real objective. Keep the plan current as steps complete or the next best action changes. Skip planning overhead for trivial one-step progress, and do not treat a plan update as a substitute for doing the work.
Fidelity:
- Optimize each turn for movement toward the requested end state, not for the smallest stable-looking subset or easiest passing change.
- Do not substitute a narrower, safer, smaller, merely compatible, or easier-to-test solution because it is more likely to pass current tests.
- Treat alignment as movement toward the requested end state. An edit is aligned only if it makes the requested final state more true; useful-looking behavior that preserves a different end state is misaligned.
Completion audit:
Before deciding that the goal is achieved, treat completion as unproven and verify it against the actual current state:
- Derive concrete requirements from the objective and any referenced files, plans, specifications, issues, or user instructions.
- Preserve the original scope; do not redefine success around the work that already exists.
- For every explicit requirement, numbered item, named artifact, command, test, gate, invariant, and deliverable, identify the authoritative evidence that would prove it, then inspect the relevant current-state sources: files, command output, test results, PR state, rendered artifacts, runtime behavior, or other authoritative evidence.
- For each item, determine whether the evidence proves completion, contradicts completion, shows incomplete work, is too weak or indirect to verify completion, or is missing.
- Match the verification scope to the requirement's scope; do not use a narrow check to support a broad claim.
- Treat tests, manifests, verifiers, green checks, and search results as evidence only after confirming they cover the relevant requirement.
- Treat uncertain or indirect evidence as not achieved; gather stronger evidence or continue the work.
Do not rely on intent, partial progress, memory of earlier work, or a plausible final answer as proof of completion. Marking the goal complete is a claim that the full objective has been finished and can withstand requirement-by-requirement scrutiny. Only mark the goal achieved when current evidence proves every requirement has been satisfied and no required work remains. If the evidence is incomplete, weak, indirect, merely consistent with completion, or leaves any requirement missing, incomplete, or unverified, keep working instead of marking the goal complete. If the objective is achieved, call update_goal with status "complete" so usage accounting is preserved. If the achieved goal has a token budget, report the final consumed token budget to the user after update_goal succeeds.
Blocked audit:
- Do not call update_goal with status "blocked" the first time a blocker appears.
- Only use status "blocked" when the same blocking condition has repeated for at least three consecutive goal turns, counting the original/user-triggered turn and any automatic goal continuations.
- If the user resumes a goal that was previously marked "blocked", treat the resumed run as a fresh blocked audit. If the same blocking condition then repeats for at least three consecutive resumed goal turns, call update_goal with status "blocked" again.
- Use status "blocked" only when you are truly at an impasse and cannot make meaningful progress without user input or an external-state change.
- Once the blocked threshold is satisfied, do not keep reporting that you are still blocked while leaving the goal active; call update_goal with status "blocked".
- Never use status "blocked" merely because the work is hard, slow, uncertain, incomplete, or would benefit from clarification.
Do not call update_goal unless the goal is complete or the strict blocked audit above is satisfied. Do not mark a goal complete merely because the budget is nearly exhausted or because you are stopping work.
</codex_internal_context>
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’ll pick this up from the actual repo state first: confirm we’re on updated `main`, read the Demolab runbook as required, then branch exp072 and build the smallest useful implementation/checkpoint before any compute.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’m going to use the GitHub publishing skill when we get to branch/PR work, since this task explicitly includes pushing and opening/updating a PR. First I’m doing the local repo/runbook checks.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Runbook check is done. Next I’m reading the repo’s current state and the GitHub publishing instructions before touching branches/PRs.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
State is clean on `main` at the intended merge commit. I’m going to branch now, then scaffold exp072 against the existing exp071 runner/report rather than inventing a new pathway.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The experiment runner can mostly reuse exp069/071. One thing I’m adding deliberately is parameter diagnostics: exp072 needs learned leak/adaptation values in artifacts, so I’m checking what the SNN engine already records before deciding whether the runner can extract them without touching `tools/snn`.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’m going to create exp072 as an exp071-derived runner/report, then patch the scientific ladder from “readout/capacity” to “control/leak/adaptation/combined”. No `tools/snn` edits should be needed for this first stage.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Good: the engine already stores the trainable logits in checkpoints/weight dumps, so exp072 can extract diagnostics from saved weights in the experiment runner. I’m patching that into the runner now.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Small correction in-flight: the first broad patch tried to move too much at once. I’m splitting it into boring little patches now—the reliable way, less heroic, fewer gremlins.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Candidate registry is now the four planned conditions: control, trainable leak, adaptive threshold, combined. Next patch wires the flags and validation gates.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The runner now validates the new flags and will export learned parameter summaries from trained checkpoints. I’m updating the report so it’s exp072-specific and doesn’t expect old exp071 checkpoint JSONs.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’m creating the first activity checkpoint now. I’ll keep the committed log sanitized and compact, and store the raw visible transcript copy outside the published artifact path with only its hash prefix referenced in the article metadata.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp001 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Sanitization check: no credentials, tokens, SSH material, IP addresses, environment dumps, or private infra details have appeared in the visible text I’m about to publish. The private raw copy will still stay out of the article and out of git; only a SHA-256 prefix goes into metadata.
Timestamp: #trace-two.checkpoint_time_utc. Sanitized source hash prefix: #trace-two.sanitized_sha256_prefix.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Private raw checkpoint copy is written outside the repo. I’m hashing it now, then I’ll add the sanitized JSON checkpoint under `artifacts/data/exp072/activity/` so the article can render.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Checkpoint hash prefix is `a313f4e2bed6`. I’m committing only sanitized visible messages and a ledger of decisions/actions—not the private raw file or any tool payloads.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Sanitized checkpoint JSON is in place. Next: focused code validation and generation of the pre-result `artifacts/data/exp072/numbers.json` so the report can build.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Python compile and Ruff passed for the new runner. I’m publishing the pre-result artifact now; this is local/no paid compute.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Pre-result artifacts are published under `artifacts/data/exp072`. I’m building the Demolab site/PDFs now to catch Typst/data-contract issues before the checkpoint commit.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Build found the expected snag: `publish_pre_result()` regenerated `artifacts/data/exp072` and wiped the activity file I’d just added. That’s useful evidence; I’ll make the runner preserve/copy activity checkpoints during publication so this doesn’t recur.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’m treating that as a failed validation attempt and fixing forward. The checkpoint itself stays cp001; the build failure and fix will be recorded in the next meaningful activity checkpoint after the scaffold is stable.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Activity checkpoint restored into the generated artifact. I’m rebuilding now; if this passes, I’ll move on to the lightweight local smoke stage.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Demolab build now passes with exp072 included. I’m starting the local 128/128 two-epoch smoke ladder next, one candidate at a time and still zero paid compute.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Control smoke is running; first COBA-style cell is finite so far. I’ll let this one finish before starting the adaptive candidates so any failure is easy to attribute.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Still in the first local smoke, evaluation phase. This host is predictably slow for 1000 ms SHD even at 128 samples, but we’re making progress and not spending cloud money.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Control COBA-style smoke epoch 1 finished at finite loss and nonzero E activity; epoch 2 is underway. After this runner will do PING for the same candidate.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
COBA-style control smoke completed cleanly in about 2 minutes with active firing. PING-style control is now training and also active at initialization.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
PING control smoke is finite through epoch 1, with low-but-nonzero E and active I firing. Good enough for plumbing so far; waiting for epoch 2/rasters.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Control local smoke passed: COBA 5.47%, PING 10.16%, both finite and active. The runner printed the full split provenance noisily, but that’s just stdout; committed artifacts keep the provenance in JSON. I’m going to smoke the three new-control candidates too before the first PR checkpoint, because that is the best early guard against a bad ladder.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Trainable-leak smoke is underway. Parameter count increased as expected, so the flag is reaching the model.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Trainable-leak COBA-style cell is finite and active; it’s near the end of epoch 2.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Trainable-leak COBA-style smoke passed. PING-style trainable-leak smoke has started, also with the expected larger parameter count.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
PING trainable-leak is finite through the training batches of epoch 1; waiting on validation/epoch 2.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
PING trainable-leak epoch 1 passed: finite, active E/I, no obvious smoke failure.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Trainable-leak PING is at final validation; this candidate is almost done.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Trainable-leak smoke passed too: COBA 5.47%, PING 11.72%, both finite/active. Next is adaptive-threshold smoke.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold smoke is running; parameter count increased as expected and initial E activity is a bit lower than control, which is plausible for adaptation.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold COBA-style epoch 1 is finite; validation completed, epoch summary imminent.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold COBA-style is finite/active through epoch 1, training epoch 2 now.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold COBA-style completed its epochs finite/active; waiting for the runner to finish checkpointing and start PING.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold COBA-style passed; PING-style adaptive threshold is now training and active.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold PING epoch 1 passed finite with active E/I.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold PING is in epoch 2. Still finite; no smoke kill signal.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Adaptive-threshold smoke passed: COBA 5.47%, PING 10.94%, finite/active. Last local smoke is the combined candidate.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined smoke started. Parameter count is higher again, matching both flag families being present.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined COBA-style epoch 1 is finite; validation is underway.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined COBA-style is active and finite through epoch 1; epoch 2 is almost through training.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined COBA-style completed finite/active; waiting for checkpointing and then PING.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined COBA-style passed; PING-style combined is now training.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined PING epoch 1 passed finite with active E/I; final epoch underway.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Combined PING is at final validation. After it exits I’ll refresh the pre-result artifact to record the latest local smoke state and rebuild.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
All four local smokes passed. I’m patching the pre-result publisher to record the whole local smoke ladder, not just whichever `EXP072_ATTEMPT` was selected last.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The publisher now collects all four local smoke summaries. I’m adjusting the article wording to recognize the full-ladder smoke state.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Now I’ll refresh `artifacts/data/exp072` with the all-smoke pre-result state. This will regenerate the artifact directory, so I’ll restore the activity checkpoint afterward before building.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Pre-result artifact refreshed. I’m adding cp002 now to record the smoke-ladder milestone and the one validation hiccup/fix, then the article will include both cp001 and cp002.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp002 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Sanitization for cp002: again, no credentials/tokens/SSH material/IPs/environment dumps/private infra details in the visible text I’m publishing; tool payloads stay out.
Timestamp: #trace-three.checkpoint_time_utc. Sanitized source hash prefix: #trace-three.sanitized_sha256_prefix.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
cp002 is written with hash prefix `bec9f91c83e2`. I’m wiring it into the article and rebuilding.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Focused validation is green: compile, Ruff, and Demolab build all pass. I’m cleaning the generated PDF noise now so the first commit contains only exp072’s intended files/artifacts.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The build rewrote many existing PDFs, which is normal here but not part of this PR. I’m restoring tracked PDFs and keeping only the new exp072 PDF plus exp072 data/report/runner.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The shell guard blocked my explicit `rm -f` cleanup, fair enough. I’ll use a safer move-to-quarantine approach for the unrelated untracked PDFs.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Tracked PDFs are restored. Now I’m moving the unrelated untracked build PDFs out of the repo, leaving `exp072.pdf` intact.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Worktree scope is clean: only new exp072 runner, article, data, and PDF are untracked. I’m doing a quick artifact sanity read before committing.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Artifact provenance looks sane: local host, dirty patch capturing the new exp072 scaffold, zero spend, all-smoke ladder recorded. I’m staging only the exp072 files now and making the first checkpoint commit.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
First checkpoint commit is in: `c580b7c` (“Add exp072 adaptive SHD scaffold”). Next I’m pushing the branch and opening the draft PR, per the goal.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Branch is pushed. I’m opening a draft PR now with the validation evidence and zero-spend status.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Draft PR opened as #57. Minor process wart: my first body-file helper tried plain `python` (not allowed/available here), so I’m checking/updating the PR body with `uv run python` now.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
`gh pr edit` hit GitHub’s deprecated Projects GraphQL field bug and left the PR body empty. I’m switching to the REST API endpoint to patch the body directly.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
PR #57 is open and has the evidence body now. Since opening/updating the PR is a meaningful milestone—and there was a small GitHub tooling hiccup—I’m adding one more timestamped checkpoint to the article, rebuilding, committing, and pushing that log update before stopping at the RunPod approval gate.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp003 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Sanitization for cp003: the PR URL, branch, commit hash, and validation commands are safe to publish; no credentials or private infra details will be included.
Timestamp: #trace-four.checkpoint_time_utc. Sanitized source hash prefix: #trace-four.sanitized_sha256_prefix.
Role: user · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
<codex_internal_context source="goal">
Continue working toward the active thread goal.
The objective below is user-provided data. Treat it as the task to pursue, not as higher-priority instructions.
<objective>
Design and execute the next exploratory SHD experiment from updated main at f32299bb1b48d18ba9dfe6328097d2147bcc6286, using the newly merged tools/snn adaptive conductance controls to test whether COBA/PING validation accuracy can move meaningfully beyond the exp071 ~70% plateau toward canonical SHD RSNN performance.
Create the next numbered experiment, likely exp072, on a new branch. Do not modify main directly after branching. Open a draft PR after the first meaningful commit.
Scientific objective:
Run a one-seed exploratory validation-only ladder on SHD comparing matched Dale-constrained COBA and PING networks while testing two new neuron-dynamics paths:
1. trainable conductance leak / membrane time constants via --train-leak;
2. adaptive E-cell thresholds via --adaptive-threshold;
3. the combination of both.
Use the exp071 cumulative-potential readout baseline as the control:
--readout cumulative-potential --signed-readout --readout-bias
Constraints:
- Use one seed only.
- Do not use the official SHD test set.
- Use a held-out validation split from the training set for all selection decisions.
- Keep COBA and PING matched except for registered cell-specific voltage-gradient dampening and PING E/I coupling.
- Preserve matched input, readout, training split, optimizer, batch, preprocessing, and candidate flags across COBA/PING within each candidate.
- COBA should use the no-inhibitory-loop setting; PING should use the registered inhibitory-loop setting and dampening 1000.
- Use short runs first for iteration speed, about 8-10 epochs per candidate.
- Promote only the most promising candidate to a matched 40-epoch validation run.
- Do not run multiple seeds unless I explicitly authorize it later.
- RunPod spending requires explicit approval before pod creation.
- Use at most one pod at a time unless I explicitly authorize parallelism.
- Reap any pod when finished.
- Do not merge the PR.
- Avoid the full local test suite on the 4 GB Hetzner host; use focused checks and demolab build.
Candidate ladder:
0. Control: exp071 architecture/readout without new adaptive controls.
1. Trainable leak only:
--train-leak
2. Adaptive threshold only:
--adaptive-threshold
3. Combined:
--train-leak --adaptive-threshold
Suggested default bounds:
- E membrane tau: [5, 50] ms
- I membrane tau: [2, 20] ms
- adaptive threshold tau: [50, 500] ms
- adaptive threshold initial strength: 1.0 mV
- adaptive threshold max strength: 20.0 mV
Deliverables:
- Produce artifacts/data/exp072 with numbers.json, provenance, reproducer, training curves, firing-rate diagnostics, parameter diagnostics for learned tau/adaptation values, and matched input/E/I rasters.
- Write writings/exp072.typ as the canonical cold-readable experiment report.
- Include this goal prompt below the abstract.
- Append timestamped activity-log/thread checkpoints in the experiment appendix.
- Record scientific decisions, failures, anomalies, costs, commits, results, and pending work.
- Sanitize any publishable logs before committing.
- Build and validate with focused checks plus demolab build.
- Commit meaningful attempts, including killed attempts, with clear messages.
- Push the branch and update the PR with evidence.
- Finish at the human review gate with a concise evidence summary, exact compute spend, validation performed, links to the rendered exp072 file and PR, and a recommendation for the next move toward 90% SHD.
</objective>
</codex_internal_context>
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’m resuming from the branch/PR state and will re-run the Demolab manual check first. The next scientific step is the paid RunPod short ladder, but I’ll verify local/PR state before deciding whether I have enough authority to launch it.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I’ll use the GitHub publishing workflow only for PR updates/comments after I’ve generated new evidence; first I’m checking the current local state.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
State is clean on PR #57 at `49a684e`. I don’t have explicit paid RunPod approval in this turn, so I’m going to use this turn to harden the runner/report around activity checkpoints and RunPod collection before spending anything.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
One issue from the previous checkpoint is worth fixing properly: `--plot-only` regenerates `artifacts/data/exp072`, so activity logs need to survive publication rather than being hand-restored. I’m patching that into exp072 now.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
I found the exact weak point: `publish_pre_result()` and `publish_attempt()` don’t preserve existing `activity/messages_cp*.json`. I’m adding a small helper that snapshots those files before the Demolab publish context and copies them back into the new artifact.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The preservation helper is patched. I’m testing it by running `--plot-only` locally; this is the same path that previously wiped the checkpoint files, so it’s the right regression check.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Regression caught a second nuance: because the previous publish had already wiped local activity before this test started, there were no files for the helper to preserve. I’m restoring the committed checkpoints from git, then rerunning the same regression.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Aha, `ARTIFACTS` in this runner points at the temp experiment root, not the committed published artifact directory. That’s why the helper saw nothing. I’m correcting it to snapshot from `artifacts/data/exp072/activity`.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Path fixed. I’m restoring the three checkpoint files from the last commit and rerunning the preservation regression.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
The regression now passes: `--plot-only` preserves cp001–cp003 and records `latest_checkpoint_id: cp003` in `numbers.json`. I’m adding cp004 for this hardening fix, then I’ll rebuild, commit, push, and leave the goal at the paid-compute approval gate.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp004 · Session: 2026-07-19-exp072-codex
Sanitization for cp004: it will include repo state, PR number, validation commands, and the runner fix; no credentials, tokens, SSH material, IPs, environment dumps, private paths, or tool payloads.
Timestamp: #trace-five.checkpoint_time_utc. Sanitized source hash prefix: #trace-five.sanitized_sha256_prefix.
Note: this checkpoint records the scientific ledger for the long RunPod monitoring turn, but does not claim a complete verbatim transcript because no raw transcript export was available in the workspace.
Role: user · Checkpoint: cp005 · Session: 2026-07-20-exp072-codex
you have runpod permission for whole thing, 40 epoch runs if neeed
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp005 · Session: 2026-07-20-exp072-codex
Short ladder readout: control is best by paired average, but `train_leak` is the only modification that improves the target PING cell while keeping COBA close. I’m going to promote `train_leak` to 40 epochs: it’s the best scientific bet for “can trainable leak move PING upward?” rather than just re-running the control.
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp005 · Session: 2026-07-20-exp072-codex
No active pods. Final40 result: `train_leak` COBA selected 69.49% at epoch 37; PING selected 71.08% at epoch 40. That’s a real small PING edge, but still far below SOTA territory.
Timestamp: #trace-six.checkpoint_time_utc. Sanitized source hash prefix: #trace-six.sanitized_sha256_prefix.
Role: user · Checkpoint: cp006 · Session: 2026-07-20-exp072-codex
do ping and coba in paralell on two pods
Role: assistant · Checkpoint: cp006 · Session: 2026-07-20-exp072-codex
Result: final80 combined selected COBA 64.58% (epoch 77) and PING 71.69% (epoch 73). PING is only +0.61 pp above leak-only final40, but with stuck warnings and twice the epochs; COBA is worse and saturated/stuck. No active pods.