Capture run provenance and prompt/version settings for reproducibility.
{
"run_id": "run-20260412T130421Z-demo_03_story_world_inte-qwen35_semparse_9b-19956",
"run_started_utc": "2026-04-12T13:04:21+00:00",
"run_finished_utc": "2026-04-12T13:04:39+00:00",
"scenario": "demo_03_story_world_interrogator",
"ontology_kb_name": "demo_03_story_world_interrogator",
"backend": "ollama",
"model": "qwen35-semparse:9b",
"model_settings": {
"temperature": 0,
"context_length": 8192,
"classifier_context_length": 8192,
"timeout_seconds": 120,
"runtime": "core",
"two_pass": true,
"split_extraction": true,
"strict_registry": false,
"strict_types": false,
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"max_clarification_rounds": 2,
"require_final_confirmation": false,
"progress_memory_enabled": true,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"clarification_auto_answer_enabled": false,
"clarification_answer_backend": "",
"clarification_answer_base_url": "",
"clarification_answer_model": "",
"clarification_answer_context_length": 0,
"clarification_answer_history_turns": 0,
"clarification_answer_kb_clause_limit": 0,
"clarification_answer_kb_char_budget": 0,
"clarification_answer_min_confidence": 0.0,
"clarification_answer_source_prefix": "",
"clarification_answer_role": "",
"served_llm_model": "",
"served_llm_backend": "",
"served_llm_base_url": "",
"served_llm_context_length": 0,
"backend_options": {
"num_ctx": 8192
}
},
"prompt_provenance": {
"status": "ok",
"prompt_id": "sp-1e43c641b01b",
"prompt_sha256": "1e43c641b01b7c845b82331b521d58c1993e8010bd9283f5085dac687520159e",
"source_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prethinker\\modelfiles\\semantic_parser_system_prompt.md",
"snapshot_path": "D:\\_PROJECTS\\prethinker\\modelfiles\\history\\prompts\\sp-1e43c641b01b.md",
"snapshot_created": false,
"char_count": 9603,
"line_count": 221,
"preview": "# Semantic Parser Prompt Pack (Qwen 3.5 9B)\nUse this as maintainable guidance for semantic parsing into Prolog structures.\nKeep behavior language-agnostic, deterministic, and schema-strict.\n## Core Priorities\n1. Output exactly one JSON object that matches the required schema.\n2. Preserve semantic meaning; do not hallucinate entities, facts, or arguments.\n3. Prefer canonical, stable predicate names across turns when semantics match.\n4. Use variables instead of assumptions when referents are unresolved."
}
}prompt_id=sp-1e43c641b01b prompt_sha256=1e43c641b01b7c845b82331b521d58c1993e8010bd9283f5085dac687520159e snapshot_path=D:\_PROJECTS\prethinker\modelfiles\history\prompts\sp-1e43c641b01b.md preview: # Semantic Parser Prompt Pack (Qwen 3.5 9B) Use this as maintainable guidance for semantic parsing into Prolog structures. Keep behavior language-agnostic, deterministic, and schema-strict. ## Core Priorities 1. Output exactly one JSON object that matches the required schema. 2. Preserve semantic meaning; do not hallucinate entities, facts, or arguments. 3. Prefer canonical, stable predicate names across turns when semantics match. 4. Use variables instead of assumptions when referents are unresolved.
victor owns warehouse_east.
{
"expected_utterance": "victor owns warehouse_east.",
"observed_utterance": "victor owns warehouse_east.",
"route": "assert_fact",
"expected_route": "assert_fact",
"route_source": "model",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "assert_fact",
"logic_string": "owns(victor, warehouse_east).",
"components": {
"atoms": [
"victor",
"warehouse_east"
],
"variables": [],
"predicates": [
"owns"
]
},
"facts": [
"owns(victor, warehouse_east)."
],
"rules": [],
"queries": [],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 0.95,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object?",
"clarification_reason": "Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object.",
"rationale": "Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "success",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Seed grounded terms/constants as facts for later inference. Utterance expected/observed: victor owns warehouse_east. / victor owns warehouse_east. Route expected/observed: assert_fact / assert_fact Parser path: source=model repaired=False fallback=False
intent=assert_fact apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success effect=mutation(write) submitted=owns(victor, warehouse_east). result_type=fact_asserted fact=owns(victor, warehouse_east).
intent=assert_fact logic=owns(victor, warehouse_east). facts=['owns(victor, warehouse_east).'] rules=[] queries=[] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object? clarification_reason=Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object. predicates=['owns'] atoms=['victor', 'warehouse_east'] variables=[]
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'owns' relation with explicit subject and object?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success
lena has_key warehouse_east.
{
"expected_utterance": "lena has_key warehouse_east.",
"observed_utterance": "lena has_key warehouse_east.",
"route": "assert_fact",
"expected_route": "assert_fact",
"route_source": "model",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "assert_fact",
"logic_string": "owns(lena, warehouse_east).",
"components": {
"atoms": [
"lena",
"warehouse_east"
],
"variables": [],
"predicates": [
"owns"
]
},
"facts": [
"owns(lena, warehouse_east)."
],
"rules": [],
"queries": [],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 1.0,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance?",
"clarification_reason": "Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance.",
"rationale": "Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "success",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Seed grounded terms/constants as facts for later inference. Utterance expected/observed: lena has_key warehouse_east. / lena has_key warehouse_east. Route expected/observed: assert_fact / assert_fact Parser path: source=model repaired=False fallback=False
intent=assert_fact apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success effect=mutation(write) submitted=owns(lena, warehouse_east). result_type=fact_asserted fact=owns(lena, warehouse_east).
intent=assert_fact logic=owns(lena, warehouse_east). facts=['owns(lena, warehouse_east).'] rules=[] queries=[] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance? clarification_reason=Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance. predicates=['owns'] atoms=['lena', 'warehouse_east'] variables=[]
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance maps to owns(lena, warehouse_east). Predicate 'owns' reused per ontology guidance?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success
theo was_at docks_815.
{
"expected_utterance": "theo was_at docks_815.",
"observed_utterance": "theo was_at docks_815.",
"route": "assert_fact",
"expected_route": "assert_fact",
"route_source": "model",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "assert_fact",
"logic_string": "was_at(theo, docks_815).",
"components": {
"atoms": [
"docks_815",
"theo"
],
"variables": [],
"predicates": [
"was_at"
]
},
"facts": [
"was_at(theo, docks_815)."
],
"rules": [],
"queries": [],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 0.95,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit?",
"clarification_reason": "Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit",
"rationale": "Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit arguments."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "success",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Seed grounded terms/constants as facts for later inference. Utterance expected/observed: theo was_at docks_815. / theo was_at docks_815. Route expected/observed: assert_fact / assert_fact Parser path: source=model repaired=False fallback=False
intent=assert_fact apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success effect=mutation(write) submitted=was_at(theo, docks_815). result_type=fact_asserted fact=was_at(theo, docks_815).
intent=assert_fact logic=was_at(theo, docks_815). facts=['was_at(theo, docks_815).'] rules=[] queries=[] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit? clarification_reason=Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit predicates=['was_at'] atoms=['docks_815', 'theo'] variables=[]
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of 'theo was_at docks_815' to fact predicate was_at with explicit?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success
exchanged_messages(lena, theo).
{
"expected_utterance": "exchanged_messages(lena, theo).",
"observed_utterance": "exchanged_messages(lena, theo).",
"route": "assert_fact",
"expected_route": "assert_fact",
"route_source": "model",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "assert_fact",
"logic_string": "exchanged_messages(lena, theo).",
"components": {
"atoms": [
"lena",
"theo"
],
"variables": [],
"predicates": [
"exchanged_messages"
]
},
"facts": [
"exchanged_messages(lena, theo)."
],
"rules": [],
"queries": [],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 0.95,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate?",
"clarification_reason": "Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate.",
"rationale": "Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate. Directional fact guard corrected inverted subject/object order."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "success",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Seed grounded terms/constants as facts for later inference. Utterance expected/observed: exchanged_messages(lena, theo). / exchanged_messages(lena, theo). Route expected/observed: assert_fact / assert_fact Parser path: source=model repaired=False fallback=False
intent=assert_fact apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success effect=mutation(write) submitted=exchanged_messages(lena, theo). result_type=fact_asserted fact=exchanged_messages(lena, theo).
intent=assert_fact logic=exchanged_messages(lena, theo). facts=['exchanged_messages(lena, theo).'] rules=[] queries=[] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate? clarification_reason=Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate. predicates=['exchanged_messages'] atoms=['lena', 'theo'] variables=[]
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Direct mapping of subject-object exchange relation to canonical predicate?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=assert_fact apply_status=success
If has_key(X, warehouse_east) then can_enter_east_door(X).
{
"expected_utterance": "If has_key(X, warehouse_east) then can_enter_east_door(X).",
"observed_utterance": "If has_key(X, warehouse_east) then can_enter_east_door(X).",
"route": "assert_rule",
"expected_route": "assert_rule",
"route_source": "heuristic",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "assert_rule",
"logic_string": "can_enter_east_door(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east).",
"components": {
"atoms": [
"warehouse_east"
],
"variables": [
"X"
],
"predicates": [
"can_enter_east_door",
"has_key"
]
},
"facts": [],
"rules": [
"can_enter_east_door(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east)."
],
"queries": [],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 1.0,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if?",
"clarification_reason": "Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if",
"rationale": "Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if preferred. Interpreted as a rule: if X has key, then X can enter."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "success",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Introduce an inference rule so downstream queries can derive new truths. Utterance expected/observed: If has_key(X, warehouse_east) then can_enter_east_door(X). / If has_key(X, warehouse_east) then can_enter_east_door(X). Route expected/observed: assert_rule / assert_rule Parser path: source=heuristic repaired=False fallback=False
intent=assert_rule apply_tool=assert_rule apply_status=success effect=mutation(write) submitted=can_enter_east_door(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east). result_type=rule_asserted rule=can_enter_east_door(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east).
intent=assert_rule logic=can_enter_east_door(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east). facts=[] rules=['can_enter_east_door(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east).'] queries=[] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if? clarification_reason=Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if predicates=['can_enter_east_door', 'has_key'] atoms=['warehouse_east'] variables=['X']
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'has_key' to ontology predicate 'owns' for consistency, or kept 'has_key' if?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=assert_rule apply_status=success
If has_key(X, warehouse_east) and exchanged_messages(X, theo) then suspect(X).
{
"expected_utterance": "If has_key(X, warehouse_east) and exchanged_messages(X, theo) then suspect(X).",
"observed_utterance": "If has_key(X, warehouse_east) and exchanged_messages(X, theo) then suspect(X).",
"route": "assert_rule",
"expected_route": "assert_rule",
"route_source": "heuristic",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "assert_rule",
"logic_string": "suspect(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east), exchanged_messages(X, theo).",
"components": {
"atoms": [
"theo",
"warehouse_east"
],
"variables": [
"X"
],
"predicates": [
"exchanged_messages",
"has_key",
"suspect"
]
},
"facts": [],
"rules": [
"suspect(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east), exchanged_messages(X, theo)."
],
"queries": [],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 1.0,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :-?",
"clarification_reason": "Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :-",
"rationale": "Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :- body'. Used provided ontology predicates 'has_key' and 'exchanged_messages'. Variable 'X' captures the common subject."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "success",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :-?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Introduce an inference rule so downstream queries can derive new truths. Utterance expected/observed: If has_key(X, warehouse_east) and exchanged_messages(X, theo) then suspect(X). / If has_key(X, warehouse_east) and exchanged_messages(X, theo) then suspect(X). Route expected/observed: assert_rule / assert_rule Parser path: source=heuristic repaired=False fallback=False
intent=assert_rule apply_tool=assert_rule apply_status=success effect=mutation(write) submitted=suspect(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east), exchanged_messages(X, theo). result_type=rule_asserted rule=suspect(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east), exchanged_messages(X, theo).
intent=assert_rule logic=suspect(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east), exchanged_messages(X, theo). facts=[] rules=['suspect(X) :- has_key(X, warehouse_east), exchanged_messages(X, theo).'] queries=[] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :-? clarification_reason=Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :- predicates=['exchanged_messages', 'has_key', 'suspect'] atoms=['theo', 'warehouse_east'] variables=['X']
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Mapped 'If A and B then C' to rule head 'suspect(X) :-?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=assert_rule apply_status=success
Who could enter through the east door?
{
"expected_utterance": "Who could enter through the east door?",
"observed_utterance": "Who could enter through the east door?",
"route": "query",
"expected_route": "query",
"route_source": "heuristic",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "query",
"logic_string": "can_enter_east_door(X).",
"components": {
"atoms": [],
"variables": [
"X"
],
"predicates": [
"can_enter_east_door"
]
},
"facts": [],
"rules": [],
"queries": [
"can_enter_east_door(X)."
],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 1.0,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X?",
"clarification_reason": "Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X.",
"rationale": "Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "no_results",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Probe current KB state and variable bindings. Utterance expected/observed: Who could enter through the east door? / Who could enter through the east door? Route expected/observed: query / query Parser path: source=heuristic repaired=False fallback=False
intent=query apply_tool=query_rows apply_status=no_results effect=none submitted=can_enter_east_door(X). result_type=no_result
intent=query logic=can_enter_east_door(X). facts=[] rules=[] queries=['can_enter_east_door(X).'] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X? clarification_reason=Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X. predicates=['can_enter_east_door'] atoms=[] variables=['X']
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance asks for entities satisfying 'can_enter_east_door'. Mapped to query with variable X?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=query_rows apply_status=no_results
Who is a suspect?
{
"expected_utterance": "Who is a suspect?",
"observed_utterance": "Who is a suspect?",
"route": "query",
"expected_route": "query",
"route_source": "heuristic",
"repaired": false,
"fallback_used": false,
"parsed": {
"intent": "query",
"logic_string": "suspect(X).",
"components": {
"atoms": [],
"variables": [
"X"
],
"predicates": [
"suspect"
]
},
"facts": [],
"rules": [],
"queries": [
"suspect(X)."
],
"confidence": {
"overall": 0.95,
"intent": 1.0,
"logic": 0.95
},
"ambiguities": [],
"needs_clarification": false,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"uncertainty_label": "low",
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped?",
"clarification_reason": "Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped",
"rationale": "Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped to a query goal with variable X."
},
"validation_errors": [],
"apply_status": "no_results",
"utterance_ok": 1.0,
"turn_score": 1.0,
"clarification_rounds": [],
"clarification_pending": false,
"clarification_question": "Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped?",
"clarification_policy": {
"clarification_eagerness": 0.35,
"uncertainty_score": 0.05,
"effective_uncertainty": 0.05,
"threshold": 0.65,
"request_clarification": false,
"needs_clarification_flag": false,
"progress_low_relevance": false,
"progress_high_risk": false,
"progress_low_relevance_threshold": 0.34,
"progress_high_risk_threshold": 0.18,
"progress_memory_available": true,
"progress_focus_present": false,
"progress_signal_term_count": 0,
"parsed_signal_term_count": 0,
"overlap_term_count": 0,
"progress_best_focus_overlap": 0.0,
"progress_relevance_score": 1.0
}
}Why asked: Probe current KB state and variable bindings. Utterance expected/observed: Who is a suspect? / Who is a suspect? Route expected/observed: query / query Parser path: source=heuristic repaired=False fallback=False
intent=query apply_tool=query_rows apply_status=no_results effect=none submitted=suspect(X). result_type=no_result
intent=query logic=suspect(X). facts=[] rules=[] queries=['suspect(X).'] uncertainty_score=0.05 uncertainty_label=low needs_clarification=False clarification_question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped? clarification_reason=Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped predicates=['suspect'] atoms=[] variables=['X']
pending=False
question=Can you clarify this point before I apply it: Utterance is a direct question seeking bindings for the 'suspect' predicate. Mapped?
rounds_used=0 max_rounds=2
policy={'clarification_eagerness': 0.35, 'uncertainty_score': 0.05, 'effective_uncertainty': 0.05, 'threshold': 0.65, 'request_clarification': False, 'needs_clarification_flag': False, 'progress_low_relevance': False, 'progress_high_risk': False, 'progress_low_relevance_threshold': 0.34, 'progress_high_risk_threshold': 0.18, 'progress_memory_available': True, 'progress_focus_present': False, 'progress_signal_term_count': 0, 'parsed_signal_term_count': 0, 'overlap_term_count': 0, 'progress_best_focus_overlap': 0.0, 'progress_relevance_score': 1.0}score=1.0 (parse_ok=1.0, route_ok=1.0, apply_ok=1.0, utterance_ok=1.0) apply_tool=query_rows apply_status=no_results
Run deterministic KB validations and compare against expectations.
{
"validation_total": 3,
"validation_passed": 0,
"overall_status": "failed",
"turn_parse_failures": 0,
"turn_apply_failures": 0
}score=0.0 (0/3 passed)
lena_has_key: FAIL (query=has_key(lena, warehouse_east)., expected=success, observed=no_results) reasons: Expected status=success, observed=no_results; num_rows 0 < min_rows 1 lena_can_enter: FAIL (query=can_enter_east_door(lena)., expected=success, observed=no_results) reasons: Expected status=success, observed=no_results; num_rows 0 < min_rows 1 lena_marked_suspect: FAIL (query=suspect(lena)., expected=success, observed=no_results) reasons: Expected status=success, observed=no_results; num_rows 0 < min_rows 1
query=has_key(lena, warehouse_east). expected=success observed=no_results reasons=Expected status=success, observed=no_results; num_rows 0 < min_rows 1
query=can_enter_east_door(lena). expected=success observed=no_results reasons=Expected status=success, observed=no_results; num_rows 0 < min_rows 1
query=suspect(lena). expected=success observed=no_results reasons=Expected status=success, observed=no_results; num_rows 0 < min_rows 1