Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

Description

@willfrey

Problem

Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

  1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
  2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
  3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

  • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
  • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
  • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

Reproduction

fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
asyncdefscorer(
input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
) ->list[Score]:
return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
# pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

Suggestion

Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
name: str,
data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
...
) -> ...:

This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

Type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions

    , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
     blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
    }
    } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
    })();
    (function(){
    try {
    var __m = "github.com";
    var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
    
    Skip to content

    Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

    Description

    @willfrey

    Problem

    Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

    1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
    2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
    3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

    This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

    • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
    • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
    • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

    There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

    Reproduction

    fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
    check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
    answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
    asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
    returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
    asyncdefscorer(
    input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
    ) ->list[Score]:
    return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
    Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
    # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

    Suggestion

    Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

    defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
    name: str,
    data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
    task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
    scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
    ...
    ) -> ...:

    This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

    Metadata

    Metadata

    Labels

    Type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
      Skip to content

      Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

      Description

      @willfrey

      Problem

      Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

      1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
      2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
      3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

      This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

      • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
      • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
      • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

      There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

      Reproduction

      fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
      check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
      answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
      asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
      returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
      asyncdefscorer(
      input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
      ) ->list[Score]:
      return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
      Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
      # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

      Suggestion

      Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

      defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
      name: str,
      data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
      task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
      scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
      ...
      ) -> ...:

      This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

      Metadata

      Metadata

      Labels

      Type

      Projects

      No projects

        Milestone

        No milestone

        Relationships

        None yet

        Development

        No branches or pull requests

        Issue actions

        , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
        Skip to content

        Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

        Description

        @willfrey

        Problem

        Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

        1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
        2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
        3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

        This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

        • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
        • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
        • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

        There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

        Reproduction

        fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
        check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
        answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
        asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
        returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
        asyncdefscorer(
        input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
        ) ->list[Score]:
        return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
        Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
        # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

        Suggestion

        Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

        defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
        name: str,
        data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
        task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
        scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
        ...
        ) -> ...:

        This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

        Metadata

        Metadata

        Labels

        Type

        Projects

        No projects

          Milestone

          No milestone

          Relationships

          None yet

          Development

          No branches or pull requests

          Issue actions

          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
          Skip to content

          Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

          Description

          @willfrey

          Problem

          Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

          1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
          2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
          3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

          This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

          • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
          • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
          • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

          There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

          Reproduction

          fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
          check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
          answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
          asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
          returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
          asyncdefscorer(
          input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
          ) ->list[Score]:
          return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
          Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
          # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

          Suggestion

          Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

          defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
          name: str,
          data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
          task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
          scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
          ...
          ) -> ...:

          This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

          Metadata

          Metadata

          Labels

          Type

          Projects

          No projects

            Milestone

            No milestone

            Relationships

            None yet

            Development

            No branches or pull requests

            Issue actions

            , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
            Skip to content

            Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

            Description

            @willfrey

            Problem

            Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

            1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
            2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
            3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

            This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

            • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
            • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
            • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

            There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

            Reproduction

            fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
            check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
            answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
            asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
            returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
            asyncdefscorer(
            input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
            ) ->list[Score]:
            return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
            Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
            # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

            Suggestion

            Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

            defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
            name: str,
            data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
            task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
            scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
            ...
            ) -> ...:

            This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

            Metadata

            Metadata

            Labels

            Type

            Projects

            No projects

              Milestone

              No milestone

              Relationships

              None yet

              Development

              No branches or pull requests

              Issue actions

              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
              Skip to content

              Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

              Description

              @willfrey

              Problem

              Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

              1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
              2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
              3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

              This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

              • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
              • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
              • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

              There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

              Reproduction

              fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
              check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
              answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
              asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
              returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
              asyncdefscorer(
              input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
              ) ->list[Score]:
              return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
              Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
              # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

              Suggestion

              Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

              defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
              name: str,
              data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
              task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
              scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
              ...
              ) -> ...:

              This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

              Metadata

              Metadata

              Labels

              Type

              Projects

              No projects

                Milestone

                No milestone

                Relationships

                None yet

                Development

                No branches or pull requests

                Issue actions

                , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
                Skip to content

                Eval generic Output parameter can't unify when expected and task return type differ #240

                Description

                @willfrey

                Problem

                Eval is generic over Output, which is shared across three positions:

                1. EvalCase[Input, Output].expected: Output | None — ground truth / assertion data
                2. EvalTask[Input, Output] return type — the actual model output
                3. EvalScorer[Input, Output] second arg — what the scorer receives as output

                This works when expected is an instance of the same type the task returns (e.g. comparing two strings). But many eval designs use expected to carry assertion specs or rubrics (what to check against the output), not an example of the output type itself. For example:

                • Task returns a TypedDict with the model's structured response
                • Expected is a frozenset[Assertion] describing what properties to verify
                • Scorer receives (str, ResponseDict, frozenset[Assertion])

                There is no valid Output that satisfies all three positions simultaneously. This forces strict-mode users to suppress reportArgumentType (pyright) or # type: ignore[misc] (mypy "cannot infer value of type parameter Output").

                Reproduction

                fromdataclassesimportdataclassfromtypingimportTypedDictfrombraintrustimportEval, EvalCasefrombraintrust.scoreimportScore@dataclass(frozen=True)classAssertion:
                check: strclassResponseDict(TypedDict):
                answer: strexplanation: strdata= [EvalCase(input="question", expected=frozenset({Assertion(check="is_correct")}))]
                asyncdeftask(input: str) ->ResponseDict:
                returnResponseDict(answer="42", explanation="because")
                asyncdefscorer(
                input: str, output: ResponseDict, expected: frozenset[Assertion]
                ) ->list[Score]:
                return [Score(name="check", score=1.0)]
                Eval("Project", data=data, task=task, scores=[scorer])
                # pyright: reportArgumentType — can't assign task/scores because Output doesn't unify# mypy: Cannot infer value of type parameter "Output" of "Eval" [misc]

                Suggestion

                Split the generic into two type parameters — one for the task output, one for the expected data:

                defEval[Input, Output, Expected](
                name: str,
                data: Iterable[EvalCase[Input, Expected]],
                task: EvalTask[Input, Output],
                scores: Sequence[EvalScorer[Input, Output, Expected]],
                ...
                ) -> ...:

                This would let Output and Expected vary independently, which matches how eval frameworks that use rubric/assertion-based scoring actually work. The current single-parameter design only works cleanly for the "compare output to golden answer" pattern.

                Metadata

                Metadata

                Labels

                Type

                Projects

                No projects

                  Milestone

                  No milestone

                  Relationships

                  None yet

                  Development

                  No branches or pull requests

                  Issue actions