Evidence readout
exact `0.422`
What the attempt taught
The public recipe was directionally better, but not enough for a win.
Why it stopped or stayed bounded
Lower LR and fewer steps recovered quality but still missed the public baseline.
Method and scope
- Experiment family: sql.
- Record kind: training run.
- Objective: sql exact match.
- Methods: sft, lora.
- Base models: qwen3-0.6b.
- Recorded data rows: 2048.
Disposition
Try targeted data weighting instead of only global hyperparameter changes.
This retained disposition is historical evidence, not authorization to restart the experiment. A new run needs a fresh question, frozen evaluator, explicit resource budget, and scoped tracking issue.
How to read this dossier
This canonical page separates the retained repository decision from the material that informed it. A source may describe an external claim, historical measurement, local observation, or planned procedure; those evidence classes are not interchangeable. Follow the provenance links before reusing a number or method.
Status and disposition describe what PostTrainLLM retained when this record was indexed. They are not a live product promise, a newly run benchmark, or permission to restart historical work. Unknown or unmeasured fields remain unknown rather than being treated as zero.
To reuse the record, first name the exact claim you need and trace it to the linked source. Then check whether the original environment, model revision, data split, evaluator, hardware, and budget match the proposed use. If they do not, treat the record as a hypothesis or design reference and run the smallest fresh comparison that can falsify it. Preserve negative outcomes and regressions beside any improvement; a local win on one slice does not silently become a general capability claim.
Source provenance
The normalized record comes from docs/attempts.json. The links below are the tracked evidence and explanatory sources preserved with the record.