CSE Roadmap

Common tier · about 3 hours · 4 parts

Part 3 of 4 · 2 min read

Exercises

Easy

Easy 1: Run it (30 minutes)

Run python -m pytest -q and python run_all.py in code/mini-feedback.

Done when: you report the naive and re-weighted satisfaction.

Easy 2: Design a feedback widget (30 minutes)

Sketch a thumbs control with reason codes for a support agent.

Done when: each reason code maps to a fix owner (prompt, tool, retrieval, policy).

Easy 3: Spot the bias (30 minutes)

List three reasons users who give feedback differ from those who do not.

Done when: each has a direction (over- or under-estimates quality).

Hint

think about power users, annoyed users and silent majority.

Medium

Medium 1: Estimate the rates (3 hours)

Simulate a 500-user random survey to estimate the feedback rates, then re-weight.

Done when: you report the error of the corrected estimate against survey size.

Hint

the survey gives you an estimate of the share of happy users among all users; combine it with the feedback counts.

Medium 2: Winner's curse correction (3 hours)

Hold out fresh votes to re-estimate the winner.

Done when: the held-out estimate is unbiased in simulation.

Hint

split votes into selection and confirmation halves.

Medium 3: Better triage (3 hours)

Extend triage_to_eval_cases to also include random unflagged traces.

Done when: you can estimate recall of the flag from expert labels.

Hard

Hard 1: Expert labelling study (8 hours)

Label real traces from your own agent. (I did not run this, so your numbers are the ground truth.)

Done when: you report precision and recall for each implicit signal with intervals.

Hard 2: Sycophancy eval (6 hours)

Write 30 cases where the user states a wrong belief and measure agreement rate. (I did not run this.)

Done when: you compare two prompts and report the difference with an interval.

Hint

include cases where agreeing would be harmless as controls.

Hard 3: Close the loop (8 hours)

Fix one real failure from feedback end to end. (I did not run this.)

Done when: the case is in the eval set, the CI gate passes, and the canary shows no guardrail regression.