Skip to content

feat: Phase F F7 negative result calibration link -- NCL- schema closes NRR-to-CAL learning loop, coverage consistency enforced, 63 tests - #902

Merged
cschanhniem merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/f7-negative-result-calibration-link
Jul 10, 2026
Merged

cschanhniem merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/f7-negative-result-calibration-link

Conversation

@cschanhniem

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Implements F7 from NEXT_100_PR_MAP: calibration link from negative-result entries to intake reports.

What

  • negative_result_calibration_link.py: NCL- prefixed dataclass linking NRR- records to CAL- intake
  • NegativeResultCalibrationLink: 10 fields (link_id, nrr_ids, intake_id, linked_at, link_type, link_rationale, batch_coverage_fraction, all_nrrs_linked, link_status, notes)
  • VALID_LINK_TYPES: 5 values (batch_failure_feedback, single_candidate_rejection, systematic_failure_pattern, assay_protocol_failure, data_quality_rejection)
  • VALID_LINK_STATUSES: 5 values (pending, submitted, accepted, rejected, superseded)
  • validate_negative_result_calibration_link(): 14 rules including coverage consistency (all_nrrs_linked=True ↔ coverage=1.0)
  • format_negative_result_calibration_link(): human-readable audit trail
  • 63 tests across 4 test classes
  • BASELINE: 7654 → 7717

Why

Negative results are only useful if they reach the calibration pipeline. Without an explicit link record, failures are silently discarded. The NCL- schema makes the NRR→CAL feedback loop an auditable artifact — you can tell from the record whether a batch of rejections was submitted for calibration intake.

Disconfirming pass

  • No calibration policy changed; only a link record schema
  • No NRR- or CAL- validation logic modified
  • Coverage consistency rule (all_nrrs_linked ↔ coverage=1.0) is bidirectional
  • No safety/release policy touched

…es NRR-to-CAL learning loop, coverage consistency enforced, 63 tests (#901)
@cschanhniem
cschanhniem merged commit 9865a73 into main Jul 10, 2026
0 of 2 checks passed
cschanhniem added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2026
…, ChangelogEntry, format_changelog, 63 tests (#902) (#903)

Co-authored-by: OpenCode <opencode@example.com>
cschanhniem added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2026
…, ChangelogEntry, format_changelog, 63 tests (#902) (#904)

Co-authored-by: OpenCode <opencode@example.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant