whatisgithub

What is gpt56-power-profile-eval?

zachar3/gpt56-power-profile-eval — explained in plain English

Analysis updated 2026-05-18

0PythonAudience · developerComplexity · 2/5Setup · easy

In one sentence

A comparative study ranking nine AI model configurations on how well they reviewed the same code change, judged by two other AI evaluators.

Mindmap

mindmap
  root((Power Profile Eval))
    What it does
      Compares AI code reviews
      Ranks by cost and accuracy
      Two meta evaluators judge
    Tech stack
      Python
      Matplotlib
      NumPy
    Use cases
      Compare AI review quality
      Regenerate evaluation charts
      Study evaluator disagreement
    Audience
      Developers
      AI researchers

Code map

Detail Auto

An interactive map of this repo's files and how they connect — its source is parsed live in your browser. Click Visualize to build it.

filefunction / class

What do people build with it?

USE CASE 1

Compare how different AI models and effort levels perform at reviewing the same code change.

USE CASE 2

Regenerate the evaluation's charts and tables from the included normalized data file.

USE CASE 3

Study why two AI meta-evaluators disagreed on ranking the same set of code reviews.

What is it built with?

PythonMatplotlibNumPy

How does it compare?

zachar3/gpt56-power-profile-eval0xallam/my-recipe0xhassaan/nn-from-scratch
Stars00
LanguagePythonPythonPython
Last pushed2022-11-22
MaintenanceDormant
Setup difficultyeasymoderatemoderate
Complexity2/52/54/5
Audiencedevelopergeneraldeveloper

Figures from each repo's GitHub metadata at analysis time.

How do you get it running?

Difficulty · easy Time to first run · 5min

Just needs pip install matplotlib numpy to regenerate the included charts.

The README does not state a license for this project.

So what is it?

This repository is a research write-up comparing how nine different AI model configurations reviewed the same piece of code, a Linux power-profile overhaul in another project called honor-control. Rather than trusting one model's opinion, the author had five different models, at various effort settings, each independently review the same set of changes, then had two separate AI evaluators judge and rank all nine reviews against each other to cut down on single model bias. The results are laid out in a ranking table showing which report scored best, how much each review cost to produce, and what each one's strength or blind spot was. The two judging models did not fully agree on which review was best: one favored a report that was most technically accurate, the other favored a report that alone caught a critical compatibility bug in a dependency. Both agreed on one thing though, that the code changes reviewed are not safe to merge or release as they stand. A cheaper, medium effort review also caught key issues that some pricier reviews missed, making it the best value option. The repository includes the individual review reports, the two meta-evaluations that scored them, a combined report reconciling the disagreements, and a script that regenerates all charts from a single normalized data file. Sixteen SVG charts cover overall scores, cost versus validated findings, and how the two judges' rankings differed. No actual hardware was touched during any review, since everything relied on reading code, checking dependency sources, and other safe checks rather than running anything live. To regenerate the graphs, install matplotlib and numpy, then run a single Python script that reads the data file and writes updated SVG images back into the documentation folder. The evaluation covered a specific commit in honor-control spanning four files and just over three hundred lines of changes, and the total cost of running all nine reviews plus the two meta-evaluations came to just over twenty three dollars.

Copy-paste prompts

Prompt 1
Explain why the two meta-evaluators disagreed on which model's code review ranked first.
Prompt 2
Walk me through running generate_graphs.py to rebuild the evaluation charts.
Prompt 3
Summarize the key findings each of the nine model reviews caught or missed.
Prompt 4
Explain the methodology this repo used to score and rank the nine review reports.

Frequently asked questions

What is gpt56-power-profile-eval?

A comparative study ranking nine AI model configurations on how well they reviewed the same code change, judged by two other AI evaluators.

What language is gpt56-power-profile-eval written in?

Mainly Python. The stack also includes Python, Matplotlib, NumPy.

What license does gpt56-power-profile-eval use?

The README does not state a license for this project.

How hard is gpt56-power-profile-eval to set up?

Setup difficulty is rated easy, with roughly 5min to a first successful run.

Who is gpt56-power-profile-eval for?

Mainly developer.

Open on GitHub → Ask about another repo

This repo across BitVibe Labs

Verify against the repo before relying on details.