`K` is the one type parameter people change, and it was last. Naming a
history in a struct field meant writing all four to say one thing:
struct Ladder { history: History<i64, ConstantDrift, NullObserver, String> }
struct Analysis<'h> { joint: Joint<'h, i64, ConstantDrift, NullObserver, &'static str> }
Now:
struct Ladder { history: History<String> }
struct Analysis<'h> { joint: Joint<'h> }
`History<K, T, D, O>`, all four defaulted. Bounds may reference later
parameters, so `D: Drift<T> = ConstantDrift` is legal in third position.
`Joint` gains the same defaults, so `Joint<'h, String>` spells it.
72 call sites swapped, and the reorder makes most of them shorter: 18
now read `History<String>` and the `&'static str` ones read `History`.
The two turbofished builders shrink from
`HistoryBuilder::<Untimed, _, _, String>::new()` to
`HistoryBuilder::<String, Untimed>::new()`.
`Joint` keeps `O` structurally, defaulted rather than removed. #72 notes
it never touches the observer, which is true — but it borrows the whole
`&'h History<K, T, D, O>` and calls `History::resolve_terms`, so dropping
the parameter means either a view type or moving that method off
`History`. The default already buys the entire user-visible benefit,
which was the spelling.
Refs #72.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011hcFjNDmHXZF8URGLku5zZ
Two names that described the wrong thing.
`scores_with_sigma(scores, sigma)` reads as "these scores have prior
sigma 2.0". The quantity is observation noise on the score *margin*, in
the units of the scores, and it is spelled `score_sigma` at every config
site — `HistoryBuilder::score_sigma`, `GameOptions::score_sigma`,
`EventKind::Scored { score_sigma }` — so this was the one place the
crate used a third meaning of "sigma" for it. Its own doc had to
disambiguate itself: "`sigma` overrides `HistoryBuilder::score_sigma`".
`scores_with_noise(scores, score_sigma)` on both `Outcome` and
`EventBuilder`.
`predict_quality` predicts nothing. Its own doc says it answers "is this
matchup *fair*", not "what will happen", and the `predict_*` family is
otherwise exactly the methods returning a probability or a distribution
over outcomes. `History::quality` also makes the free/method pair
consistent: free `quality` pairs with `History::quality` the way free
`expected_information_gain` already pairs with
`History::expected_information_gain`. The rule that was already being
followed and never stated — a free function scores a hypothetical from
explicit parameters, the same-named method asks it against the fit — is
now written on the method.
Closes#75. Refs #78 (part 4).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011hcFjNDmHXZF8URGLku5zZ
`converge` refuses to report a NaN fit. Nothing stopped a caller from
ignoring that error and predicting anyway, and every prediction path was
differently wrong when they did. Measured on a point-mass-prior history
with `beta(0.0)`, after `converge` returned `NonFiniteResult`:
predict_quality = Ok(NaN)
predict_outcome().total() = NaN
predict_win_probabilities = Ok([0.0, 0.0])
The third is the dangerous one: finite, plausible, and summing to zero
against a doc that promises one at `p_draw == 0`. A caller checking
`total() ≈ 1` catches the second and misses it.
The same parameters on a *scored* event converge cleanly and leave
legitimate point-mass posteriors. There `predict_quality` **panicked** —
"cannot invert a singular matrix", out of a method returning `Result` —
because the contrast covariance `beta²AᵀA + AᵀSA` is exactly singular,
and `predict_win_probabilities` again returned `Ok([0.0, 0.0])`. That
promise assumes continuous performances, where an exact tie has measure
zero; point masses break the assumption, not the arithmetic.
Both checks now live at `member_skills`, the one gate every prediction
path reads skills through, rather than being repeated per method.
The finiteness check is on `mu` / `sigma`, not on the natural parameters.
The first attempt checked `pi` and `tau`, and measurement showed it
rejected a *legitimate* point mass — `pi = inf`, `mu = 0`, `sigma = 0` —
turning a working prediction into an error. The question is whether the
usable moments exist, and those are what predictions consume.
Docs: `converge_partial` omitted the drift-variance `InvalidParameter` it
validates before sweeping, and the free `expected_information_gain`
omitted `GridTooCoarse`, which comes from `outcome_distribution` and so
is not covered by its "anything `Game::ranked` returns" clause.
Refs #78 (parts 1 and 2; the layering and `predict_quality` rename
questions are still open).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011hcFjNDmHXZF8URGLku5zZ
logaritmiskandClaude Opus 5