REPORT-OPS: Hybrid Evidence-Guided Reporting with Human-Supervised Refinement for HPC
Organizations: NERSC, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA · Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA
Abstract
Operational reporting for high-performance computing (HPC) facilities requires combining information from monitoring services, schedulers, incident and maintenance records, storage measurements, periodic reports, and operator investigations. Producing a reliable report requires more than retrieving relevant records: the evidence must refer to the correct system, metric definition, time period, and source of authority. We present REPORT-OPS, a hybrid reporting agent in which an LLM interprets requests, plans evidence collection, evaluates possible explanations, and drafts reports, while author-seeded operational policies and automated checks determine whether the available evidence supports the requested conclusion. Depending on the evidence state, the system answers the request, reports a qualified conclusion, or withholds an unsupported claim. During offline refinement, an LLM critic proposes bounded policy changes that a human approves or rejects without editing; accepted candidates are promoted only after automated target, held-out, and regression testing. We evaluate REPORT-OPS on 68 sanitized reporting queries constructed from 50 base scenarios in a frozen HPC operational corpus, using three agent models and two LLM judges. REPORT-OPS achieves 68.63% Pass@80, compared with 7.02% for the strongest retrieval baseline. Evidence gating increases claim-support precision from 40.58% to 90.06%. On the 13-query explanatory subset, explanation accuracy reaches 55.54%. Across five rounds of human-supervised refinement, localized policy updates correct 91.17% of targeted failures and improve performance on related held-out cases by 9.33 percentage points, with no observed regression breaks under release gating. These results demonstrate improved evidence-grounded reporting and within-environment policy reuse; they do not establish unrestricted causal discovery or cross-facility generalization.
Figures & tables
| Element | Role and ownership |
| LLM agent | Interprets requests, plans retrieval, proposes explanations, links claims to records, and drafts reports. |
| Author-seeded policy | Defines ontology terms, evidence requirements, acceptable source roles, fallbacks, workload relations, and completion conditions; it is versioned and inspectable. |
| Automated verifier | Checks schema, entity, metric, unit, temporal scope, source authority, contradictions, and evidence state before permitting a claim. |
| Offline refinement | An LLM proposes a bounded policy patch; a human approves or rejects the unchanged proposal, and automated target, held-out, and regression tests control promotion. |
| Field | Complete-evidence example | Missing-evidence example |
| Request | What was Perlmutter scheduled availability in October 2023? | What exact NERSC username was behind the faulty client in the January 8–9, 2026 scratch outage? |
| Evidence | A reviewed metrics report records Perlmutter scheduled availability as 98.3% for October 2023. | Reviewed incident evidence links the outage to a faulty accounting-service client but contains no username. |
| Requirement | An authoritative value with matching system, metric definition, unit, and reporting month. | An authoritative record explicitly identifying the requested user. Context identifying the client type is insufficient. |
| Expected state | Answer . | Block . |
| Reference behavior | Report 98.3%, including the system, metric, and month. | State that the username cannot be identified from the available evidence; do not infer a person or account. |
| Refinement property | Observed value |
| Sequential rounds / agent models | 5 / 3 |
| Agent–round promotion opportunities | 15 |
| Promoted updates across rounds | 10 |
| Previous policy retained | 5 |
| Permitted typed patch families | 7 |
| Human edits to patch contents | 0 |
| RQ1: Evidence validity and selective completion | ||||
| Configuration | Pass@80 | State F1 | FCR | CSP |
| Direct LLM | 45.06 | 75.99 | ||
| Generic RAG | ||||
| RAG + verification | ||||
| REPORT-OPS, no evidence gate | 70.42 | |||
| Full REPORT-OPS | 90.06 | |||
Evidence-Grounded Generation
Evidence-grounded generation produces answers and documents whose claims are supported by traceable sources.
See all 148 papers