Genome Analyzer

Genome Analyzer

Family-level analysis, retrieval, replay, and patch proposal for Failure Genomes.

When to Use

1. After creating a new genome → cluster it into a family
2. After fixing a bug → retrieve similar genomes to check for patterns
3. Before promoting a patch → run replay on family members
4. Periodically → generate health report

Capabilities

1. Family Clustering

Input: A new genome file (FG-NNNNNN.json) Process:

1. Read FAMILY_INDEX.json for existing families
2. For each family, compute match score:

   match_score = 0
   + 3 if same failure_family
   + 2 if same violated_invariant
   + 1 per overlapping stack_tag
   + 1 per overlapping surface_tag
   + 2 if repair_operator in same neighborhood
   

3. If best match_score ≥ 5 → assign to that family
4. If best match_score < 5 → create new family

Output: Updated FAMILY_INDEX.json

2. Similarity + Utility Retrieval

Input: Current incident context (stack tags, surface, failure type) Process:

1. Filter genomes by overlapping context fingerprint
2. Score each by: relevance_score = similarity * 0.4 + utility_score * 0.6
3. Sort descending
4. Return top 5

Why utility matters: Semantic similarity alone returns "looks similar" genomes. Utility-weighted retrieval returns "similar AND useful" genomes. A genome with utility 0.9 that matches 3 tags beats a genome with utility 0.2 that matches 5 tags.

3. Replay Before Promotion

Input: Proposed patch + genome + family members Process:

FOR EACH family member genome:
  1. Read the incident that caused it
  2. Mentally simulate: would the proposed patch have caught this?
  3. Score: PASS (would have prevented) or FAIL (would not have helped)

FOR 1-2 holdout genomes (different family):
  1. Check: does the patch obviously break this scenario?
  2. Score: SAFE (no regression) or REGRESS (patch causes harm)

COMPUTE:
  family_pass_rate = pass_count / family_total
  holdout_safe = all holdouts are SAFE

DECISION:
  IF family_pass_rate >= 0.6 AND holdout_safe → PROMOTE
  IF family_pass_rate >= 0.6 AND NOT holdout_safe → REVIEW (manual)
  IF family_pass_rate < 0.6 → REJECT or REFINE

Output: Updated genome replay field + promotion_decision

4. Patch Type Recommendation

Based on the failure genome, recommend which patch type is most effective:

5. Health Report Generation

Run cli/tama-genome-report.js to generate:

{
  "report_date": "2026-03-18",
  "total_genomes": 7,
  "total_families": 7,
  "families_by_count": [
    { "family": "verification-skipped-before-done", "count": 1, "avg_utility": 0.9 }
  ],
  "repair_operators_by_reuse": [
    { "operator": "add-production-verification-step", "reuse_count": 5 }
  ],
  "patch_types_by_win_rate": [
    { "type": "rule_patch", "promoted": 6, "rejected": 0, "win_rate": 1.0 }
  ],
  "stale_genomes": [],
  "low_utility_genomes": [],
  "transferred_genomes": {
    "successful": 0,
    "failed": 0
  }
}

Utility Decay Formula

After 30 days without use: score *= 0.9
After 90 days without use: score *= 0.7
After each reuse:          score *= 1.1 (cap 1.0)
After prevention:          score *= 1.2 (cap 1.0)
After negative transfer:   score *= 0.5

Anti-Patterns for Genome Analysis

1. Over-clustering: Different failures merged into one family → keep families narrow
2. Under-clustering: One family fragmented into tiny buckets → merge if same invariant
3. Utility lock-in: Old genomes dominate → apply decay
4. Negative transfer: Imported genome harms local repo → track and penalize
5. Replay poverty: Not enough family members → promote with caveat "replay: not_run"