Spaces:
Running
Running
Commit History
-
docs: how to cite the platform
README gains a "How to cite" section with the three references, the DECISIONS entry records why the strings live in one backend module (and that the author line is the PI's to confirm), and the changelog describes the button. Also corrects the README's stale test count: 137 to 174.e867cf8
-
docs(corpus): record the CAMEL licence; the dataset link is fine
Correcting an earlier claim of mine: the dataset link is NOT broken. The HF repo is public and GATED, not private - the page returns 200 for anyone, and only file downloads require signing in and accepting the terms, which is ordinary for a research dataset. I had tested the file URL and generalised it to the page. Checking that surfaced something that does matter. CAMEL is licensed CC BY-NC 4.0, and nothing in the repo said so, while README states the project is MIT and sample_data/camel_sample.csv - 999 rows of that corpus - sits in the tree. Nothing here relicenses it, but a reader had no way to know the sample carries different terms from the code around it. Examples now record their own licence. It shows in the info dialog and rides in run metadata next to the citation, so a researcher who exports results has the terms in the same file as the scores. README and sample_data/README name CC BY-NC 4.0 for the bundled sample explicitly and separate it from MIT, and the guide states i…5411f5f
-
fix(constructs): resolve the review's open questions from Noor's answers
She replied with the source she used for each disputed item, and every one checks out. Three of the four disagreements were about which PRINTING of a scale is authoritative, not about who read it correctly. MFQ Fairness: I was wrong to revert her. She read the questionnaire printed at the end of Graham et al. (2011), which is the paper this construct cites, and it does say "treated differently from others" (twice). The moralfoundations.org MFQ30 handout says "than others". Her correction is applied and source_url now points at the paper, so items, citation, and source finally agree. RSES and CBI work-related burnout: she used the source_url recorded on each construct, and both mappings are exactly right against it. The Rosenberg questionnaire at socy.umd.edu starts with "I feel that I'm a person of worth" and its wording and reverse keys match ours item for item, so only our ORDER was wrong. Both are reordered to the printed order with item ids renumbered, so item_id means "source it…0af19f8 -
fix(constructs): verify MFQ against the source the review sheet omitted
Checking whether the follow-up questions for the reviewer were fair turned up that two of them were not. The review sheet shipped with an EMPTY source_url for mfq_care and mfq_fairness, so the reviewer had nothing to check those against and correctly flagged it. That was our omission, not a missing document: the MFQ30 is public, all four items in each construct match it verbatim, and both are now verified with the source recorded. This also settles the "differently than/from others" disagreement in favour of the wording already stored. Also confirmed independently, so the reviewer does not need to be asked: the Subjective Happiness Scale PDF at the source_url we gave her does read "Compared to most of my peers", exactly as she corrected it. And for context on the two item-order findings: the APA measures-package printing of the RSES numbers its items exactly as we store them, while the reviewer's renumbering matches another widely-used printing. Same version-mismatch pattern as Edmo…10425ec -
fix(constructs): correct the review pass after a validity review
A research-validity review of the previous commit found four real problems. All four are fixed here. Two of the reviewer's wording corrections moved an item AWAY from the publication its construct cites, and I had applied them under a `verified` badge. Checked against the sources: the published MFQ30 reads "treated differently than others" (not "from"), and Edmondson (1999) reads "It is safe to take a risk on this team" (not "in") - the proposed "in this team" comes from a third-party questionnaire, whose URL I had also promoted over the working Edmondson PDF. Both items keep their published wording, both constructs are held back as unverified with the disagreement recorded, and the source_url override is dropped. The reviewer's item-ORDER findings for rses and cbi_work_related_burnout were silently dropped: my classifier only read notes on rows that failed one of the four checks, and these sat on rows marked OK. Order feeds item_hash and decides what sim_item_N means, so both are no…461b859 -
docs: MIT-only license, keep planning docs out of a public repo
LICENSE (MIT) was already committed; the two untracked drafts beside it were an exact duplicate and an Apache-2.0 alternative representing a decision nobody had made. Single MIT, both drafts removed, README now states it and separates the code license from the questionnaire items, which belong to their original authors. Root-level .docx files are gitignored: the deployment plan and the item generation proposal are PI correspondence that lives in the lab's Drive, and this repo is public. docs/design/*.docx stays tracked. Also corrects two stale ROADMAP entries (anchor vectors shipped on 2026-08-22; the LICENSE line still claimed the repo had none) and records the library-versioning, license, and benchmark decisions. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>1b10b34
-
Apply PI decisions: full construct library (rights approved), anon cap 200, drop CRS
PI approved including questionnaire items in public repos; library now ships all 94 constructs (CRS removed per PI). Anonymous row cap 200.4ce78b4
-
Sync platform from lab mainline: dev instance ready to deploy
Full feature set: accounts (email/password + feature-flagged Google via Supabase PKCE), anonymous tiers (3 runs/day, delete-after-analysis, 24h purge), saved-run cap, construct upload from CSV/XLSX, structured warnings + language detection, model registry (MiniLM/E5), per-run reproduction scripts, corpus-embedding cache, storage interface (local/ R2), sample-data test kit, MANUAL_TESTING.md. Rights guard: only the 5 original seed constructs ship in this public repo; the imported lab collection stays out pending the redistribution decision. HF remote URL detokenized. 64 tests passing.4b09d2d
-
CCR Platform: web platform for Contextualized Construct Representations
Upload a corpus, select or define a validated psychological construct, run CCR analysis with locally-hosted sentence embeddings, inspect per-item loadings and score distributions, export results with a reproducibility record. - FastAPI backend, SQLite, worker-queue jobs with orphan recovery - React dashboard (prebuilt; no Node needed to run) - Tolerant corpus ingestion (encodings, delimiters, caps, warnings) - Seeded construct library with citations; custom constructs - 17 tests via a deterministic embedding backend (no ML deps needed) - Docker deploy for Hugging Face Spaces / Cloud Rund69ace5