| Human Prompting | Published Recipe | Agent’s Edit | Agent’s Reach | Agent’s Failure |
|---|
| Stage 1, Construct Structural Space (LM carrier, i1 – i10 ): 10 candidates, 25 attempts, 1 admitted, 33 GPU-h. |
| Baseline Specification FPO paper only; observer mode 5 manual unblocks; 1.4k chars/day | Disclosed (7): 1,000 pairs, 100 speakers, gap 0.3, batch 64, 2 epochs, lr 2e-6, AdamW Unstated: 14 | Data: 462-pair pilot → 1,155 predicted → 967 (quality gate) → 923 (exact mask) → 920 trained Algo: FPO form kept; 14 unstated → 21 search coordinates | Result: hard zh CER 7.47 → 6.90, zh CER 1.41 → 1.35 (inside seed band) Recovered: 45% of FPO’s zh CER gain, 5% of its Bad case drop | None: 5 halts = intentional pauses Cost: 33 GPU-h for a gain inside seed variance |
| Stage 2, Execute Heuristic Search (LM carrier, i11 – i31 ): 21 candidates (31 with Stage 1), 3 admitted; chain closes at i20 . |
| Trajectory Guidance 1 falsifiable mutation/round 1.8k chars/day (peak); harness 203k chars | Objective: token-wise sum, no margin Data: pairs generated once, never refreshed; starts at reference | Data: i20 920 cached → 360 on-policy pairs (205 en, 155 zh) Algo: i14 equal-pair masked mean; i15 margin −logσ(β(Δ−m)) ; warm vs. frozen reference | Result: zh CER 1.41 → 1.07, en WER 2.85 → 2.47, hard zh 7.47 → 6.41; tail 13.6% unmoved Source: data cut, not objective edits | Distribution Leak: held-out set in proposer context ( i29 – i31 ) Rejected: i16 – i19 at the 512-condition gate |
| Stage 3, Redefine Search Space (flow carrier, g1 – o45 ): 45 candidates; 27 probes (depth ≤5 ), 18 full, 9 to 500 steps. |
| Pivot Authorization symptom only; survey unrequested 0.7k chars/day | FlowTTS-GRPO: GRPO on decoder LoRA; CosyVoice3/F5-TTS Reward: z(SECS)+z(1−CER)+0.4z(DNSMOS) , linear | Data: 192 conditions, UTMOS22 bands (dead <3.0 ) Proxy: DNSMOS → UTMOS22 shaped σ((u−3)/0.15) , w=0.4 ; SeACo zh CER Algo: decoder bottleneck → 11-paper survey → stochastic ODE sampler | Result: 22/24 dead conditions revived at 500 steps; band mean UTMOS22 2.75 → 3.44 Held-out: Bad case 13.4 → 6.1%; zh CER at base | Reward Hacking: UTMOS22 overstates held-out UTMOSv2 gain by 43–56% (zh only) Gap: no flow candidate contract-gated |