10 KiB
Analyze Pattern Library Effectiveness
Evaluate how well the pattern library is improving iteration quality.
Usage
/project:analyze-patterns <pattern_library_path> <iterations_dir>
Arguments
pattern_library_path- Path to pattern library JSON fileiterations_dir- Directory containing iterations to analyze
Examples
# Analyze pattern effectiveness
/project:analyze-patterns pattern_library/patterns.json output
# Generate detailed metrics report
/project:analyze-patterns pattern_library/patterns.json output
How It Works
This command measures the effectiveness of pattern-guided generation:
- Load Pattern Library: Read current patterns and metadata
- Iteration Analysis: Examine all iterations for pattern adoption
- Quality Comparison: Compare pre-pattern vs post-pattern iterations
- Pattern Attribution: Identify which patterns are most adopted
- Effectiveness Report: Generate metrics showing pattern impact
Implementation Steps
Step 1: Load Pattern Library
# Read pattern library
Read pattern_library_path
# Parse JSON and extract:
- Total patterns per category
- Pattern characteristics
- Example files
- Success metrics
Step 2: Categorize Iterations
# List all iterations chronologically
Bash: ls -lt iterations_dir
# Determine which iterations were generated before/after pattern library:
- Pre-pattern iterations: Generated before library creation
- Post-pattern iterations: Generated with pattern guidance
Step 3: Pattern Adoption Analysis
For each post-pattern iteration:
Analyze file content to detect pattern usage:
Structural patterns:
- Check for modular architecture
- Verify naming conventions
- Identify organizational patterns
- Match against library examples
Content patterns:
- Evaluate documentation quality
- Check comment patterns
- Assess clarity metrics
- Compare to library standards
Innovation patterns:
- Look for creative techniques from library
- Identify novel applications of patterns
- Detect pattern combinations
Quality patterns:
- Check for validation logic
- Identify error handling approaches
- Verify testing patterns
- Measure robustness
Calculate Pattern Adoption Rate:
Adoption Rate = (Iterations using 1+ patterns) / (Total post-pattern iterations)
Step 4: Quality Comparison
Compare iterations before and after pattern library:
Pre-Pattern Iterations:
- Average quality score: {score}
- Structural consistency: {variance}
- Innovation diversity: {count}
- Common issues: {list}
Post-Pattern Iterations:
- Average quality score: {score}
- Structural consistency: {variance}
- Innovation diversity: {count}
- Common issues: {list}
Improvement Metrics:
- Quality increase: {percent}%
- Consistency improvement: {percent}%
- Innovation increase: {count}
- Issue reduction: {percent}%
Step 5: Pattern Impact Ranking
Rank patterns by their impact:
{
"most_adopted_patterns": [
{
"pattern_name": "Modular Three-Layer Architecture",
"category": "structural",
"adoption_count": 8,
"adoption_rate": "80%",
"avg_quality_improvement": "+15%"
},
{
"pattern_name": "Progressive Disclosure Documentation",
"category": "content",
"adoption_count": 6,
"adoption_rate": "60%",
"avg_quality_improvement": "+12%"
}
],
"least_adopted_patterns": [
{
"pattern_name": "Self-Validating Data Pipeline",
"category": "innovation",
"adoption_count": 2,
"adoption_rate": "20%",
"possible_reasons": ["Too complex", "Not applicable to all specs"]
}
]
}
Step 6: Pattern Evolution Analysis
Track how patterns have evolved across versions:
Pattern Library Version History:
- v1.0 (Wave 1): 12 patterns extracted
- v1.1 (Wave 2): 13 patterns (1 new structural pattern)
- v1.2 (Wave 3): 14 patterns (1 new innovation pattern)
Pattern Turnover:
- Patterns removed: 2 (replaced by better examples)
- Patterns added: 4
- Patterns refined: 3
- Stable patterns: 10
Step 7: Multi-Shot Effectiveness
Evaluate how well patterns serve as examples (multi-shot prompting):
Multi-Shot Prompting Metrics:
Example Clarity:
- Patterns with clear code snippets: {count}/{total}
- Patterns with measurable success metrics: {count}/{total}
- Patterns with diverse examples: {count}/{total}
Example Impact:
- Iterations citing pattern examples: {count}
- Average patterns used per iteration: {number}
- Pattern combination frequency: {percent}%
Example Quality:
- Patterns from top 20% iterations: {percent}%
- Pattern diversity score: {score}/10
- Pattern transferability: {score}/10
Step 8: Generate Effectiveness Report
Create comprehensive analysis report:
# Pattern Library Effectiveness Report
**Generated**: 2025-10-10T15:00:00Z
**Pattern Library**: pattern_library/patterns.json (v1.2)
**Iterations Analyzed**: 20
## Executive Summary
The pattern library has improved iteration quality by **{percent}%** and increased structural consistency by **{percent}%**. Pattern adoption rate is **{percent}%**, indicating strong effectiveness.
## Key Findings
### Pattern Adoption
- **Total Iterations**: 20 (10 pre-pattern, 10 post-pattern)
- **Adoption Rate**: 80% (8/10 post-pattern iterations use patterns)
- **Avg Patterns per Iteration**: 3.2
- **Most Common Pattern**: Modular Three-Layer Architecture (80% adoption)
### Quality Improvement
- **Pre-Pattern Quality**: 7.2/10 average
- **Post-Pattern Quality**: 8.8/10 average
- **Improvement**: +22%
- **Consistency**: Variance reduced from 1.8 to 0.6
### Pattern Impact Rankings
#### Most Effective Patterns
1. **Modular Three-Layer Architecture** (Structural)
- Adoption: 80%
- Quality Impact: +15%
- Why: Clear structure, easy to replicate
2. **Progressive Disclosure Documentation** (Content)
- Adoption: 60%
- Quality Impact: +12%
- Why: Improves readability, scalable approach
3. **Guard Clause Pattern with Fallbacks** (Quality)
- Adoption: 50%
- Quality Impact: +18%
- Why: Prevents errors, improves robustness
#### Least Adopted Patterns
1. **Self-Validating Data Pipeline** (Innovation)
- Adoption: 20%
- Reason: Complex, not applicable to all specs
2. **{Pattern Name}** ({Category})
- Adoption: {percent}%
- Reason: {explanation}
### Pattern Evolution
- **Library Versions**: 1.0 → 1.2 (3 waves)
- **Patterns Added**: 4
- **Patterns Removed**: 2
- **Stable Core**: 10 patterns remain consistent
### Innovation Impact
- **Pre-Pattern**: 12 unique innovations
- **Post-Pattern**: 18 unique innovations
- **Change**: +50% increase
- **Observation**: Patterns provide foundation, enabling more innovation
## Multi-Shot Prompting Analysis
### Example Quality
- ✓ All patterns include code snippets
- ✓ 95% have measurable success metrics
- ✓ Diverse examples (3-5 per category)
### Example Effectiveness
- **Pattern Citation Rate**: 75%
- **Average Patterns per Iteration**: 3.2
- **Pattern Combination**: 40% of iterations combine 2+ patterns
### Example Consistency
- **Uniform Structure**: All patterns follow JSON schema
- **Clear Success Metrics**: 95% of patterns
- **Transferability**: 85% applicable across different specs
## Recommendations
### High-Priority Actions
1. **Promote Top Patterns**: Feature most effective patterns prominently
2. **Refine Low-Adoption Patterns**: Simplify or provide better examples
3. **Document Pattern Combinations**: Show successful pattern pairings
4. **Expand Success Metrics**: Add quantitative measurements
### Pattern Library Improvements
1. Add "Pattern Combination" category for synergistic patterns
2. Include anti-patterns (what NOT to do) for contrast
3. Provide minimal vs maximal examples of each pattern
4. Create pattern decision tree for easier selection
### Future Analysis
1. Track pattern effectiveness over longer time periods
2. A/B test pattern-guided vs non-pattern iterations
3. Measure context efficiency (patterns reduce context needs?)
4. Survey agent "preferences" for certain patterns
## Visualizations
### Quality Score Distribution
Pre-Pattern: [==== ] 7.2/10 avg (variance: 1.8) Post-Pattern: [========] 8.8/10 avg (variance: 0.6)
### Pattern Adoption Over Time
Wave 1: [ ] 0% (no patterns yet) Wave 2: [====== ] 60% adoption Wave 3: [======== ] 80% adoption Wave 4: [========= ] 90% adoption (projected)
### Top Patterns by Category
Structural: Modular Three-Layer [========] 80% Content: Progressive Disclosure [======] 60% Innovation: Novel Data Binding [====] 40% Quality: Guard Clause [=====] 50%
## Conclusion
The pattern library demonstrates strong effectiveness as a multi-shot prompting mechanism. Pattern adoption rate of **{percent}%** and quality improvement of **{percent}%** validate the approach. Continued refinement and expansion of the library will further enhance iteration quality and consistency.
**Next Steps**: Continue pattern extraction after each wave, focusing on emerging patterns and successful combinations.
---
**Pattern Library Location**: {pattern_library_path}
**Report Generated**: 2025-10-10T15:00:00Z
Metrics Tracked
This command calculates and reports:
-
Adoption Metrics
- Pattern adoption rate
- Patterns per iteration
- Most/least adopted patterns
-
Quality Metrics
- Pre/post quality comparison
- Consistency improvement
- Error rate reduction
-
Innovation Metrics
- Unique innovations count
- Pattern combinations
- Novel pattern applications
-
Evolution Metrics
- Library version progression
- Pattern turnover rate
- Stable vs emerging patterns
-
Multi-Shot Effectiveness
- Example clarity scores
- Example impact measures
- Example quality validation
Validation
The analysis ensures:
- Sufficient data: At least 5 iterations analyzed
- Version tracking: Pattern library versions are sequential
- Quality scoring: Consistent methodology applied
- Attribution accuracy: Patterns correctly identified in iterations
- Statistical validity: Comparisons are meaningful
Notes
- Analysis should be run after each wave to track progression
- Metrics help identify which patterns to keep/remove/refine
- Quality improvements validate the pattern synthesis approach
- Low adoption patterns may need better examples or documentation
- This analysis informs pattern library curation decisions
Related Commands
/project:infinite-synthesis- Main loop generating iterations/project:extract-patterns- Extract patterns from iterations