Open reproductions
A small open decision model: state + typed questions -> calibrated probabilities. A Jev / System One re-creation on Qwen3.5.
"/v1/systemone", json={"model": model, "state": state, "questions": questions, **extra}The link points at the commit we read, so the line number still holds.
These question sets are lifted from this project's source exactly as written.
from docs/app.js:18
queuechoiceWhich team should handle this ticket?
payments — Payouts, refunds, invoices, failed chargesaccount — Login, profile, permissions, 2FAother — Anything elseescalatetrue/falseShould this ticket be escalated to a human manager right away?
urgencyscoreHow urgent is this ticket?
0 — Low: can wait several days1 — Medium: should be handled today2 — High: money or access is blocked right nowrefund_requestedtrue/falseDoes the customer explicitly ask for a refund?
import { experimental_evaluate as evaluate } from 'ai';
const { answers } = await evaluate({
model: 'typesafe-ai/jev',
state,
questions: {
queue: { type: 'choice', instructions: 'Which team should handle this ticket?',
criteria: { payments: 'Payouts, refunds, invoices, failed charges', account: 'Login, profile, permissions, 2FA', other: 'Anything else' } },
escalate: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Should this ticket be escalated to a human manager right away?' },
urgency: { type: 'score', instructions: 'How urgent is this ticket?',
criteria: ['Low: can wait several days', 'Medium: should be handled today', 'High: money or access is blocked right now'] },
refund_requested: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Does the customer explicitly ask for a refund?' },
},
});from docs/app.js:28
subjectchoiceWhat is the main subject of the photo?
landscape — outdoor scenery, nature, cityscapedocument — text, screenshot, receiptproduct — an object for sale, packagingcontains_texttrue/falseDoes the image contain readable text?
matches_captiontrue/falseDoes the `caption` in the state accurately describe the photo?
qualityscoreHow good is the technical image quality?
0 — Unusable: extremely blurry, dark, or corrupted1 — Poor: noticeable blur, noise, or bad exposure2 — Acceptable: minor flaws3 — Good: sharp and well exposedimport { experimental_evaluate as evaluate } from 'ai';
const { answers } = await evaluate({
model: 'typesafe-ai/jev',
state,
questions: {
subject: { type: 'choice', instructions: 'What is the main subject of the photo?',
criteria: { landscape: 'outdoor scenery, nature, cityscape', document: 'text, screenshot, receipt', product: 'an object for sale, packaging' } },
contains_text: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Does the image contain readable text?' },
matches_caption: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Does the `caption` in the state accurately describe the photo?' },
quality: { type: 'score', instructions: 'How good is the technical image quality?',
criteria: ['Unusable: extremely blurry, dark, or corrupted', 'Poor: noticeable blur, noise, or bad exposure', 'Acceptable: minor flaws', 'Good: sharp and well exposed'] },
},
});from docs/app.js:38
has_bluetrue/falseIs there a blue shape in the photo?
clutterscoreHow cluttered is the photo?
0 — empty or one or two simple shapes1 — several objects2 — very busy sceneimport { experimental_evaluate as evaluate } from 'ai';
const { answers } = await evaluate({
model: 'typesafe-ai/jev',
state,
questions: {
has_blue: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Is there a blue shape in the photo?' },
clutter: { type: 'score', instructions: 'How cluttered is the photo?',
criteria: ['empty or one or two simple shapes', 'several objects', 'very busy scene'] },
},
});from docs/pr.js:5
kindchoiceWhat kind of change is this pull request, judging from the title, description and the files touched?
feature — adds new user-facing behaviour or capabilitybugfix — corrects incorrect behaviourrefactor — restructures code without changing behaviourdocs — documentation, comments, changelog onlytests — adds or changes tests onlychore — build, CI, dependencies, formatting, release plumbingdescription_matchestrue/falseDoes the `body` accurately describe what the changed `files` and `stats` suggest the PR does?
breaking_changetrue/falseIs this likely a breaking change for users of this project (public API, config format, CLI flags, behaviour that callers rely on)?
needs_migrationtrue/falseDoes this change need a data or schema migration, or a coordinated rollout (e.g. database, stored formats, protocol versions)?
riskscoreHow risky is merging this PR, considering scope, the areas touched and how easy it is to reason about?
0 — trivial: docs, comments, formatting, isolated tests1 — low: small, local, easy to reason about2 — medium: touches shared logic or several files; a careful review is warranted3 — high: core behaviour, data handling, security, or concurrency; could break usersimport { experimental_evaluate as evaluate } from 'ai';
const { answers } = await evaluate({
model: 'typesafe-ai/jev',
state,
questions: {
kind: { type: 'choice', instructions: 'What kind of change is this pull request, judging from the title, description and the files touched?',
criteria: { feature: 'adds new user-facing behaviour or capability', bugfix: 'corrects incorrect behaviour', refactor: 'restructures code without changing behaviour', docs: 'documentation, comments, changelog only', tests: 'adds or changes tests only', chore: 'build, CI, dependencies, formatting, release plumbing' } },
description_matches: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Does the `body` accurately describe what the changed `files` and `stats` suggest the PR does?' },
breaking_change: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Is this likely a breaking change for users of this project (public API, config format, CLI flags, behaviour that callers rely on)?' },
needs_migration: { type: 'boolean', instructions: 'Does this change need a data or schema migration, or a coordinated rollout (e.g. database, stored formats, protocol versions)?' },
risk: { type: 'score', instructions: 'How risky is merging this PR, considering scope, the areas touched and how easy it is to reason about?',
criteria: ['trivial: docs, comments, formatting, isolated tests', 'low: small, local, easy to reason about', 'medium: touches shared logic or several files; a careful review is warranted', 'high: core behaviour, data handling, security, or concurrency; could break users'] },
},
});