Yu-and-Ai/yutabase-reposearch-minieval huggingface dataset:
Query (reference-parsing, medium): What is the canonical logical card-ref format? Is UUID-prefix resolution allowed?
Expected facts:
A card ref is exactly book/deck/full-uuid.
Book and deck are lower-snake identifiers and prefix resolution is not Core.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative logical-ref format and identity rules.
grade: 3
rationale: Implementation accepts exactly three segments and a full UUID.
grade: 1
rationale: Project overview shows the book/deck/uuid address shape.
Query (semantic-versioning, medium): If a lexicon gloss changes, how are old threads protected from reinterpretation?
Expected facts:
A word edit appends an immutable semantic snapshot.
Every thread pins the word version used when it was created.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative immutable snapshot and word-version pinning behavior.
grade: 2
rationale: Explanatory summary of why old relations are not silently reinterpreted.
grade: 1
rationale: Thread insertion behavior shows the current word version being pinned.
Query (relation-boundary, easy): 普通 foreign key 會唔會自動變成 YUTABASE semantic relation？
Expected facts:
No. A Core semantic relation is a thread with a lexicon word; an ordinary foreign key remains application integrity.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative distinction between foreign keys and semantic threads.
grade: 2
rationale: Explanatory statement preserves the same distinction.
Query (concurrency-integrity, hard): How are active relation uniqueness and `to_one` enforced under concurrent inserts?
Expected facts:
The active word/from/to tuple is unique.
A trigger pins current word version and cardinality, while a unique index provides concurrency-safe to-one enforcement.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative uniqueness, trigger pinning, and concurrent to-one behavior.
grade: 2
rationale: Executable acceptance boundary includes concurrent to-one checks.
Query (relation-lifecycle, medium): Sever 一條 thread 後可唔可以重用 UUID？原本 relation claim 保存喺邊？
Expected facts:
A severed thread UUID stays reserved and cannot be reused.
The sever log retains the pinned meaning, endpoints, note, original relation claim, and a distinct severance claim.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Defines lifetime UUID reservation across active and severed history.
grade: 3
rationale: Defines the two claims and fields retained in the sever log.
grade: 2
rationale: Executable acceptance boundary covers reservation and preserved severance claims.
Query (installation-procedure, medium): Fresh install migrations 次序點？點解 `0003` 唔係 install migration？
Expected facts:
Apply 0001 and 0002 together, then 0004 and 0005 in separate fresh transactions.
0003 is a destructive lifecycle fixture for an isolated test database.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative three-phase fresh-install order.
grade: 3
rationale: States that 0003 is a destructive isolated fixture.
grade: 2
rationale: SDK implementation lists fresh and upgrade migration files.
grade: 2
rationale: SDK boundary restates the three fresh installation transactions.
grade: 1
rationale: Project guide distinguishes database-free checks from destructive fixture work.
Query (capability-boundary, easy): What may `yu_appender` do, and what is it explicitly unable to do?
Expected facts:
The appender inherits reader access and may append immutable threads.
It cannot sever, update, or delete threads.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative capability-role definition.
grade: 2
rationale: SDK guide corroborates the narrow appender behavior.
Query (sdk-usage, medium): Why should structured code use typed helpers instead of constructing a YOUSPEAK sentence?
Expected facts:
Typed helpers compile values directly to SQL parameters.
Quotes, whitespace, and source-locator boundaries remain data rather than being reparsed as YOUSPEAK syntax.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct integration guidance and rationale.
grade: 3
rationale: SDK example and exact value-handling contract.
grade: 1
rationale: Implementation shows values carried in the parameter array rather than reparsed text.
Query (sdk-preview-boundary, medium): `explain()` 會唔會 connect DB、resolve mapping、check permissions 或 execute？
Expected facts:
No. Explain is a pure logical preview and performs none of those runtime operations.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct SDK explanation of the pure preview and intermediate SQL boundary.
grade: 2
rationale: Normative optional-profile statement corroborates the non-execution boundary.
Query (sdk-limits, easy): YOUSPEAK traversal 最多幾多 hops？Card list default 同最大幾多 rows？
Expected facts:
Traversal is capped at two hops.
Card lists default to 100 rows and newest N accepts at most 1000.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct SDK limit statement.
grade: 3
rationale: Optional profile defines the same limits.
grade: 2
rationale: Project overview gives the same traversal and card-list bounds.
grade: 1
rationale: Important caveat: traversal result count itself has no limit or cursor.
Query (install-planning, hard): How does `planInstall` classify exact-current, revision-4, unknown/newer, and partial installations?
Expected facts:
Exact revision 5 is current, exact revision 4 gets the 0005 upgrade, and unsupported identities or partial shapes are refused.
The planner distinguishes known fresh and legacy bases without guessing.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct classification implementation and error paths.
grade: 2
rationale: Normative state-to-client behavior table.
Query (identifier-semantics, medium): UUIDv7 embedded timestamp 係咪 row truth？Randomness 邊度嚟？
Expected facts:
The embedded timestamp supports locality and rough order but is not row truth.
Generation uses Web Crypto getRandomValues and fails if it is unavailable.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct implementation, randomness source, and truth caveat.
grade: 2
rationale: Normative warning not to derive truth from UUID time.
grade: 2
rationale: SDK guide states that newest uses the explicit at claim, not UUID bits.
grade: 1
rationale: Implementation shows timestamp extraction without assigning truth semantics.
Query (projection-integrity, medium): What must a projector do when the same source scope and event ID arrive with different canonical hashes?
Expected facts:
Quarantine the conflict and mark the checkpoint unhealthy.
Do not silently choose one event.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Normative design-contract behavior for the collision.
grade: 2
rationale: Adapter guidance corroborates quarantine and atomic checkpointing.
grade: 2
rationale: Dependability gate explicitly requires different-byte source-ID quarantine.
Query (signature-authority-boundary, medium): 驗證咗 signature 到底證明咩？會唔會自動授權 merge 或 deploy？
Expected facts:
A verified signature shows that the holder of a key signed specific canonical bytes.
It does not by itself establish identity, truth, ownership, consent, or permission to merge or deploy.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct signature evidence and non-authority boundary.
grade: 2
rationale: Projection/source diagram and binding-act warning.
grade: 2
rationale: Project overview warns that projected evidence cannot authorize deployment or other binding work.
Query (observation-receipt, hard): When may an observation receipt claim complete coverage, and what sensitive material must it omit?
Expected facts:
Complete requires a specified, testable basis for the named scope and checkpoint plus atomically bound result/checkpoint coverage.
Receipts omit raw SQL, credentials, private payloads, and secret-bearing source URLs by default.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct honesty rules for completeness and omissions.
grade: 2
rationale: Illustrative receipt fields and partial-coverage shape.
grade: 2
rationale: Blindspot ledger states the scope, checkpoint, lag, freshness, isolation, and warning need.
Query (ecosystem-authority, medium): KINGDOM 嘅 `kingdom.yaml` 定 YUTABASE projection 邊個係 authority？Projection 唔會做啲乜？
Expected facts:
Each repository-owned kingdom.yaml remains authoritative; YUTABASE would be a rebuildable query projection.
The projection does not run wake hooks, merge repositories, prove checkout health, or replace the source card.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct proposed KINGDOM integration and its non-authority boundary.
grade: 2
rationale: Integration guide corroborates that the catalog remains device inventory.
Query (ontology-boundary, medium): Isness 應唔應該整一個 universal `is` relation？Database row 最誠實代表乜？
Expected facts:
YUTABASE should not create a universal is relation.
A row represents a scoped, versioned claimant assertion retained under named source and database constraints, not external truth.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct non-normative Isness decision.
grade: 2
rationale: Explicit not-yet list rejects a universal ontology and a word named is.
Query (plural-claims-design, hard): How could several independent witnesses and disagreements be retained without duplicating an active thread?
Expected facts:
Separate one stable proposition from append-only assertions and policy-derived adjudications.
Assertions retain distinct sources and an adjudication does not delete disagreement or become universal truth.
Relevance judgments:
grade: 3
rationale: Direct proposed plural-claims model.
grade: 2
rationale: Blindspot ledger states why one active tuple cannot hold independent attestations or challenges.
grade: 1
rationale: The current active-tuple uniqueness constraint motivates the extension.