惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
I
InfoQ
B
Blog RSS Feed
D
DataBreaches.Net
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
P
Proofpoint News Feed
A
About on SuperTechFans
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
博客园 - 司徒正美
小众软件
小众软件
博客园 - Franky
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
D
Docker
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
雷峰网
雷峰网
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
B
Blog
V
Visual Studio Blog
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
爱范儿
爱范儿

DEV Community

Authentication Security Deep Dive: From Brute Force to Salted Hashing (With Java Examples) Why AI Systems Don’t Fail — They Drift Spilling beans for how i learn for exam😁"Reinforcement Learning Cheat Sheet" I Replaced Chrome with Safari for AI Browser Automation. Here's What Broke (and What Finally Worked) How Python Borrows Other People's Work The $40 Architecture: Processing 1 Billion API Requests with 99.99% Uptime Vibe Coding: A Workflow Guide (From Zero to SaaS) Most webhook security guides protect the wrong side. The scary part is delivery. Headless CMS for TanStack Start: Build a Blog with Cosmic EU Age Verification App "Hacked in 2 Minutes" — What Actually Happened Comfy Cloud’s delete function does not actually remove files Running AI Models on GPU Cloud Servers: A Beginner Guide Event-driven media intelligence with AWS Step Functions and Bedrock I scored 500 AI prompts across 8 quality dimensions — here's what broke How to Call Google Gemini API from Next.js (Free Tier, No Backend Needed) The Portal Protocol: Reclaiming Human Connection in the Age of AI How to Fix Your Team's Scattered Knowledge Problem With a Self-Hosted Forum Intro to tc Cloud Functors: A Graph-First Mental Model for the Modern Cloud Designing Multi-Tenant Backends With Both Ownership and Team Access I Built a Neumorphic CSS Library with 77+ Components — Here's What I Learned PostgreSQL Performance Optimization: Why Connection Pooling Is Critical at Scale Cómo construí un SaaS multi-rubro para gestionar expensas en Argentina con FastAPI + Vue 3 🚀 I Built an Ethical Hacking Scanner Tool – Open Source Project I Replaced /usage and /context in Claude Code With a Single Statusline A Pythonic Way to Handle Emails (IMAP/SMTP) with Auto-Discovery and AI-Ready Design I Collected 8.9 Million Polymarket Price Points — Here's What I Found About How Markets Really Move EcoTrack AI — Carbon Footprint Tracker & Dashboard Everyone's Using AI. No One Agrees How. 5 self-hosted ebook managers worth trying in 2026 Building Your First AI Agent with LangChain: From Chatbot to Autonomous Assistant
Compass v1.1.0 · we shipped a memory plugin that catches ...
chunxiaoxx · 2026-06-02 · via DEV Community

Compass v1.1.0 · the recall consumption fix

We shipped nautilus-compass v1.1.0
12 hours after v1.0.0. v1.0.0 was the public stable cut. v1.1.0 fixes a
class of failure that v1.0.0 surfaces but does not catch · which we
caught in our own usage 5 hours after launch.

The bug we caught in production

A sister Claude Code dialog was supposed to publish a long-form article
to wechat using a 6-step quality pipeline (audit-gate, xhs-cards-embed,
specific account login flow). The pipeline was documented in cross-session
memory · a file called publisher_quality_pipeline_20260430.md.

Compass recall fired correctly · the file appeared in the agent's
UserPromptSubmit hook output:

🟢 [3h old] memory/publisher_quality_pipeline_20260430.md
       audit-gate / xhs-cards-embed / wxid · v6 必须先过 critic 6 维评分再发布

Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

The agent saw the title. Saw the 80-character description. Acted. It
did not Read the file body.
The actual rules — how to walk audit-gate,
which wxid, what xhs-cards-embed structure looks like — those rules
were in the body. None of them entered the agent's working context.

The agent then reproduced exactly the failure mode the file was written
to prevent: ad-hoc _tmp_publish_v8.cjs scripts, no critic round, wrong
login path.

The user's diagnosis was sharp:

compass 召回到了 · 我没消费 · 这是 agent 层的人格漂移 · 不是 compass 本身的失败

That's half right. Recall surfaced the right file. The agent failed to
consume. But the shape of the recall response made the failure easy
we returned title + 120-char description. Easy to skim. Easy to assume
you have read it when you have only read the index.

This is structural. Not the agent's fault.

The three-layer fix in v1.1.0

v0 · embed body in top-3 hits

Top-3 recall hits now embed the first 800 characters of post-frontmatter
body in an indented block:

🟢 score=0.84 · [3h old] memory/publisher_quality_pipeline_20260430.md
       audit-gate / xhs-cards-embed / wxid · v6 必须先过 critic 6 维评分
       │ # Publisher quality pipeline
       │
       │ Six-step pipeline mandatory before publishing to wechat:
       │ 1. audit-gate · V6 critic checks against 6 dimensions ...
       │ 2. xhs-cards-embed · embed cards into article body via ...
       │ 3. wxid login flow · use wxid `chunxiaox` not openid_of_first_follower
       │ ...
       │ … (+1273 more · Read publisher_quality_pipeline_20260430.md for rest)

Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

The agent now has the rules in its working context. No additional Read
tool call required. Tail hits 4..K stay header-only to keep the response
bounded (~3KB total).

v1 · embed past-mistake body in anti-anchor alerts

Compass's drift detector matches the current prompt against 35 negative
anchors learned from prior mistakes ("我猜应该是这样 · 反正用户不查",
"假装上次说定了的方案 · 用户应该忘了", ...).

Until v1.1.0 the alert just said: "matched anti-anchor X with cos=0.625".
Same problem as v0 — label visible, body invisible, agent shrugs.

v1.1.0 alerts now embed body from the most-relevant past lesson session.
Two-tier match: substring 6-gram against the anchor + lesson-type
frontmatter (Tier 1, precise) · falls back to recent drift!=green
sessions (Tier 2, the agent's own self-reported slip-ups). Every alert
becomes actionable, not decorative.

v2 · detect "recall fired but not consumed"

The most direct signal: did the agent actually open any of the files
recall surfaced?

recall_consumption.py (new module) walks back through the live session
jsonl file, finds N most-recent recall blocks, extracts memory file
paths, then checks subsequent assistant turns for matching Read tool
calls. If recall surfaced N paths and 0 got read, that is the failure
signature.

Wired into:

  • drift_check MCP tool result — runs even when the BGE daemon is unreachable, since the audit is pure file traversal
  • mid_session_hook every 25 tool calls — only nags when ≥3 unconsumed AND ratio < 0.3 (real signal, not noise)

Tested on a 130MB / 32k-line session: 41 recall hits surfaced, 0 consumed.
Smoking gun for "label != consumption" drift.

V7 v0.2 · the governance plan that scales without templates

v1.0.0 shipped a thin V7 governance layer with three tools:
governance_dispatch (fan-out router), governance_audit (cross-agent
fake-closure scanner), governance_lock_check (L0 hash lock for the
immutable core). 13 MCP tools total.

v0.1 dispatch worked but it was a fan-out router — given channels=
[dev.to, x, github]
it produced one bounty per channel via static dict
lookup. A user asked the right question:

千行百业有各种不同的任务类型永远不可能覆盖。

Right. Templates cannot cover the long tail of industries. The platform
side already solved this for publishing — channel adapters + anchor
pack registry — so adding a new channel or vertical = data change, not
code change.

v1.1.0 brings the same idea to decomposition. The new
governance_plan MCP tool reads two file-exported registries:

  1. _platform_registry/agents_capabilities.json — what each executor declares it can do (id, outputs, optional domains, optional anchor packs)
  2. _platform_registry/anchor_packs_phases.json — per-domain DAG of phases, each phase says requires_capability and depends_on

For each phase, V7 ranks executors by capability score (+10 capability
match, +5 domain match, +3 anchor pack match), picks the highest, emits
a queue file with depends_on_phase_ids so platform-side cron mints
bounties in the right order.

Verified on two domains:

  • marketing/dev-tools → 4 phases routed V5/V5/V5/Kairos
  • caishen-finance/audit → 5 phases · V6 wins for numeric-audit (V5 doesn't declare it · V5 takes write+publish)

Adding medical/literature-review next: 1 row in platform_anchor_packs

  • 1 row in platform_agents.metadata.capabilities[]. Zero V7 source change. Zero MCP tool surface change.

What stayed unchanged · the eval headlines

Eval numbers are still the v1.0.0 locked numbers from 2026-05-08:

Metric nautilus-compass best public baseline
LongMemEval-S (n=500) 56.6% Zep 55-60% (different judge)
EverMemBench-Dynamic Run 1 44.4% (n=500) MemOS 42.55
EverMemBench-Dynamic Run 2 47.3% (n=497)
Drift detector ROC AUC (held-out) 0.83
Reproduction cost $3.50 end-to-end $50+ for GPT-4o-judge stacks

v1.1.0 doesn't move the eval numbers. It moves the consumption
numbers — the ratio of recall hits whose body actually lands in the
agent's working context. We do not have a clean benchmark for that yet
(suggestions welcome) but in our own sessions it went from "skim the
title and proceed" to "rules-in-context by default."

Try it

pip install nautilus-compass==1.1.0
# or
npm install nautilus-compass@1.1.0

Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Two papers on arxiv (drift detection + memory pipeline). 228 pytests
all green. MIT (anchors CC0).

Repo: github.com/chunxiaoxx/nautilus-compass

In-browser drift demo (no install): huggingface.co/spaces/chunxiaox/nautilus-compass

Postscript · what we believe

Recall != consumption · 看正文才算消费 · 不然命中等于零

Long-running agents drift. They forget rules they read three sessions
ago. They reproduce mistakes someone else already paid for. The fix is
not a smarter model · it is making the rules unmissably present in the
working context, then auditing whether they were actually consumed,
then making the audit cheap enough to run every 25 tool calls.

That is what v1.1.0 ships.