Vs Meta Opt

VS Meta Opt

Purpose

Operate a feedback loop that judges and improves the optimizer, not the bespoke system it produces. Run VibeSys, observe whether its search is effective, change VibeSys when evidence supports a meta-hypothesis, resume the campaign under the new version, and determine whether the trajectory improved.

Preserve a strict boundary:

• Treat candidate implementation choices and domain performance techniques as inner-loop work.
• Treat role behavior, search policy, prompts, skill availability, evidence, evaluation, context, lifecycle, and cost control as meta-optimization surfaces.
• Do not become a shadow candidate designer.

Read Only What Is Relevant

• Read run-control.md before launching, monitoring, pausing, resuming, or terminating a long-running VibeSys campaign.
• Read effectiveness-rubric.md to audit a round, trajectory window, or multiple campaigns.
• Read counterfactual-review.md before using independent subagents to assess whether VibeSys is choosing strong next steps.
• Read diagnosis-and-levers.md to attribute a deficiency, choose a VibeSys control lever, or check for prompt leakage.
• Read meta-experiments-and-commits.md before changing VibeSys or validating whether a system change helped.
• Use meta-run-pr-template.md to open and maintain the required draft PR.

Read campaign state, history, prompts, diffs, logs, profiles, timings, costs, and evaluations from artifact paths. Read deltas after the initial inspection; do not repeatedly inject durable history or unchanged output into context.

Run Contract

Before starting, record in the draft PR:

• Exact VibeSys command, specified input paths and revisions, environment, and initial VibeSys commit.
• Campaign identity, initial checkpoint, and correctness/evaluation contract.
• Maximum rounds, wall-clock time, accelerator time or cost, agent budget when applicable, and meta-interventions.
• A terminal reserve for final official evaluation, evidence publication, and cleanup.
• Initial trusted frontier and available effectiveness measurements.

Treat one VS Meta Opt run as one bounded meta-optimization campaign. It owns one branch and one draft PR, but may contain multiple VibeSys process segments, sequential meta-hypotheses, clean commits, validations, and explicit reverts.

Control Loop

1. Open the draft PR

Start from the intended VibeSys parent on a dedicated clean branch. Open the draft PR before changing behavior and initialize meta-run-pr-template.md. Use its description as the living effectiveness ledger.

2. Launch or resume VibeSys

Run VibeSys with the specified input and exact recorded command. Preserve the campaign checkpoint and candidate state across process restarts. Record the VibeSys commit governing each campaign segment.

Use the simple edit path by default: finish the current round, stop or pause VibeSys, edit and commit in the same checkout, then resume. When overlapping work is worthwhile, optionally develop in a separate clean worktree while leaving the active framework checkout unchanged. Treat every framework change as inactive until a recorded campaign segment starts or resumes under its commit.

3. Monitor with adaptive heartbeats

Choose the next sleep interval from the current phase, expected duration, progress signal, failure risk, and budget. Check sooner during startup, near a deadline, or after a warning; sleep longer during healthy work that is expected to take time. Avoid busy polling.

After each sleep, inspect only new status, events, summaries, or a bounded log tail. If nothing changed and the process is healthy, do not rerun semantic analysis or reinsert unchanged output.

Perform at least one trajectory check after every completed VibeSys round. Between round completions, use heartbeats only to verify liveness, phase progress, deadlines, and resource safety.

4. Check the trajectory after every round

Use a lightweight per-round check to answer:

• Did the round produce valid new evidence or frontier progress?
• Did the next decision respond to the evidence available?
• Is VibeSys repeating a known failure, tuning within noise, or losing context?
• Did evaluation, coordination, or infrastructure consume disproportionate work?
• Are correctness, provenance, and reward-hacking defenses intact?
• Does enough budget remain for the current path or another meta-experiment?

If the trajectory remains healthy, record a compact checkpoint and continue without proposing a change. Trigger a deeper audit when a warning recurs, the trajectory plateaus, integrity is uncertain, cost rises unexpectedly, or the current validation window ends.

When the next-step quality is uncertain—especially during a plateau—consider a counterfactual trajectory review using counterfactual-review.md. Give fresh subagents the legitimate objective and raw artifact paths, but withhold VibeSys's proposed next step until they produce independent alternatives. Do not run this panel automatically after every round.

5. Audit and form the next meta-hypothesis

Apply effectiveness-rubric.md at round, window, and campaign timescales. Classify findings, including Other when nothing fits cleanly, and identify the narrowest VibeSys-owned mechanism supported by evidence.

When a counterfactual review exists, compare its proposals with VibeSys's choice using evidence fit, causal model, expected impact, falsifiability, cost, integrity, and novelty. Do not assume the subagents are right. If a stronger alternative exposes a proposal gap, explain why VibeSys missed it using the failure taxonomy before changing anything.

Propose one next system intervention with expected meta-metric effects, likely regressions, a validation window, success criteria, and a reversion condition. Improve how VibeSys generates or evaluates directions; do not paste the stronger candidate proposal into an always-on prompt. If evidence is insufficient, improve instrumentation before changing behavior.