Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
logaritmiskandClaude Opus 5 f692906ce4 docs: state what the joint's cost actually scales in
A consumer measured an 8x difference in solve time between two fits over
the same events, the same slices and the same ~2,000 nodes:

  career fit   (gamma = 0)      787 ms
  drifting fit (gamma = 0.15)  6214 ms

Entirely the collapse rule. A competitor with zero drift contributes one
variable however long the history, so a drift-free fit's joint is smaller
than a drifting one's by roughly the slice count — and to factorise, by
its cube. Choosing a drift configuration is therefore also choosing a
query cost, and nothing said so.

Documented on `Joint`, on `Joint::variables` and on `posterior_of`, with
the measurement. `variables()` is named as the number that decides
affordability, since it can be read before committing to a batch.

Also states the thing the consumer proposed as a future optimisation,
because it is already true: an absence is not an appearance, so a
competitor seen in the first and last of a hundred slices contributes two
variables rather than a hundred. The matrix is already as small as the
model allows on that axis.

tests/joint_handle.rs pins the mechanism — ten slices, two competitors,
twenty variables drifting against two at `gamma = 0` — so a change to the
collapse rule cannot quietly remove the property the docs now promise.

Refs #51

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011hcFjNDmHXZF8URGLku5zZ
2026-09-08 19:45:51 +02:00
logaritmiskandClaude Opus 5 1bb6bb31d8 feat: factorise the joint once with History::joint
`posterior_of`, `posterior_of_at` and `expected_variance_reduction` each
built the joint precision matrix, factorised it, asked one question and
threw it away. The factorisation is O(n^3) in the history's appearances
and depends only on the fit, so a caller asking about every pair in a
standings table, every cell in a grid, or every candidate in an
active-learning sweep paid for the same factorisation once per question.

`History::joint()` returns a `Joint` handle that pays it once. Measured
on 1976 appearances, 90 queries: 68.4s one-shot against 745ms factorise
plus 93ms of queries — 81.6x, with bit-identical answers. Per query,
Criterion at 480 appearances: 9.0ms one-shot against 48us cached, 187x.

The handle borrows the history, which is what makes it correct with no
invalidation logic: the borrow checker forbids adding events or refitting
while it is alive, so there is no window in which the factorisation could
describe a fit that no longer exists. It also makes the lifetime of the
n^2 factor explicit rather than parking it in the history forever — at
4000 appearances that is 128MB, which is not something to cache silently.

Every question the joint answers turns out to be a bilinear form,

    c^T A^-1 a = (L^-1 c) . (L^-1 a)

so no caller ever needs L^-1 c itself. Replacing the general solve with a
forward substitution drops the back substitution as wasted work, halving
a query, and removes a failure mode: a variance as `c . (A^-1 c)` is a
difference of products that can round negative, where `|L^-1 c|^2` is a
sum of squares and cannot.

The one-shot calls are unchanged in cost and now delegate to the handle,
so the two paths cannot drift apart. tests/joint_handle.rs asserts they
agree bit for bit, including at pinned times, under UnknownKeys::Prior,
and across candidate matchups.

Refs #51

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011hcFjNDmHXZF8URGLku5zZ
2026-09-08 07:53:51 +02:00