# Case Study: WhetstoneDSL ## Why This Is The First Case Study WhetstoneDSL is already using the Routed-Specialist Architecture for bounded editor and workflow decisions. That makes it the right proving ground for `whetstone_RSA`. Relevant existing work: - `/home/bill/Documents/CLionProjects/whetstone_DSL/specialists/HANDOFF-2026-03-28.md` - `/home/bill/Documents/WhetstoneAI_Fabricate/HANDOFF-2026-03-29.md` ## What Is Already Proven The current specialist fleet established that tiny transformers can replace some LLM calls in the MCP pipeline when the outputs are bounded. Documented examples: - `verification_type` - 5-way classifier - `83.7%` in the initial handoff, later `84.9%` at step 4000 in the current history - `confidence_tier` - 3-way classifier - 100% held-out accuracy - `worker_type` - 4-way classifier - `88.5%` at step 4000 in the current history - `prereq_op` - 4-way classifier - `69.4%` and flat across steps 1000-4000 in the current history - `automatability` - 6-way classifier - `69.6%` and flat across steps 1000-4000 in the current history Shared properties: - bounded vocabulary - deterministic downstream meaning - AST-first architecture - millisecond-scale inference - ~800KB checkpoint size ## Important Constraint Whetstone is AST-first, not language-first. That means RSA gates should generally live at the AST or orchestration layer, not be duplicated per target language. The model should choose bounded structural decisions; deterministic projection handles language output. ## Current Opportunity The current Whetstone specialist work suggests there are at least three gate bands: - low-entropy gates that are formula-like and should stay deterministic - medium-entropy gates that fit the ~800KB specialist tier - higher-entropy bounded gates that may need 10x to 16x larger models, better schemas, or multi-stage decomposition This project should turn those bands into a measurable sizing policy. ## Current Snapshot The active case study is already informative enough to shape the policy: - `confidence_tier` is effectively deterministic in disguise and should be judged as a formula baseline, not as evidence for model capability - `verification_type` and `worker_type` look viable at the tiny tier, but should be evaluated through abstain and retry policy rather than raw accuracy alone - `prereq_op` and `automatability` are currently below an obvious auto-accept bar at the tiny tier Just as important, the current larger-model runs are not yet producing accuracy comparisons. The logs show startup on `hidden=512, layers=4`, but the runs abort before any substantive training result is recorded. That means the current frontier is: - tiny-tier accuracy is known - large-tier cost is partially visible - large-tier quality is not yet known So the correct immediate move is not "chase bigger until better." It is to adopt a deployment policy that measures accepted-risk performance while the larger-tier infrastructure is being stabilized. ## Interpretation This case study strongly suggests that raw held-out accuracy is not enough to drive the roadmap. For WhetstoneDSL, the more relevant questions are: - which gates are reversible? - which gates are validated by deterministic checks later? - which mistakes silently poison later stages? - which gates can abstain cheaply and retry with more context? That is why `whetstone_RSA` should treat deployment quality as a system metric, not a model-only metric. ## Candidate Gate Inventory Immediate WhetstoneDSL gate families: - `verification_type` - `confidence_tier` - `prereq_op_selector` - `worker_type` - `gap_class` - `escalation_predictor` - `automatability_strategy` These are good initial benchmarks because they already have: - clear output enums - architectural value - known downstream consequences - mixed difficulty levels ## What To Measure For each gate: - output cardinality - slot count - ambiguity of the input surface - context width required - label boundary sharpness - train/eval accuracy - calibration quality - failure concentration by class - smallest model size that clears target quality ## Working Hypothesis The main predictor will not just be the number of output labels. A gate can be 3-way and still difficult if it depends on: - long context - latent intent reconstruction - weakly separable labels - hidden state - domain-specific lexical variation So the sizing function should be based on effective entropy, not enum size alone. ## Why This Matters If Whetstone can tag nodes, route tasks, select templates, and choose review paths through bounded specialists, then LLM use becomes residual instead of default. That would make the AST-first environment cheaper, faster, more local, and easier to retrain per project.