Skip to content
DenseChip
Learn
PracticeCode labInterview

DenseChip

Navigate

Menu

LearnPracticeCode labInterview

Tools

All toolsSV editorCode repoResume
DenseChip

Practice, courses, and chip-design tools in one focused workspace.

LearnPracticeCode labInterviewToolsLearning paths

© 2026 DenseChip

AboutContactPrivacyTerms
Skip to lesson

Course contents

  • Getting Started with AI for VLSI Engineers5
  • Just Enough AI: Models and Context15
  • Prompting13
  • Trust and Verification14
  • Using AI for Engineering Work17
  • Engineering Walkthroughs7
  • Practical Foundations for AI Workflows4
  • Engineering Data5
  • Retrieval-Augmented Generation6
  • Agents and Tool Use18
  • Agent Design8
  • MCP and Skills6
  • Multi-Agent Design6
  • Practical Capstone6
  • Tokens, Cost and Latency12
  • Agentic Workflows for Chip Teams18
    • Regression Triage Agent
      • The Nightly Triage Loop
      • Clustering Failures by Signature
      • Ranking Suspects with Evidence
      • Read-Only by Default
      • Evaluating Against Labelled History
    • Lint-and-Fix Loops
    • Guardrails and Human in the Loop
    • Evaluating and Operating Agents
  • Interview and Judgment10
  • AI Skills: Full Course Index
  • Working with AI Glossary
  • Working with AI Cheatsheet
Loading lesson

‹Regression Triage Agent
  1. Topics
  2. AI Skills for VLSI Engineers
  3. Agentic Workflows for Chip Teams
  4. Regression Triage Agent
  5. Evaluating Against Labelled History

Reference: Agentic Workflows for Chip Teams · Beginner to Intermediate

Evaluating Against Labelled History

Precision, recall, and top-1 accuracy measured on engineer-labelled history.

On this page

    Labels

    Engineers label past nights once, and every agent version is graded against the same labels. Each label records the true group per run and the true culprit commit per group.

    Label

    Records

    Used for

    True group

    Which runs share one root cause

    Cluster precision and recall.

    True culprit

    The commit that fixed the group

    Suspect ranking accuracy.

    Cluster metrics

    Clustering is graded as pairs. Precision asks how many proposed pairs are true pairs, and recall asks how many true pairs were proposed.

    plaintext
    1
    2
    3
    4
    proposed pairs = 40, correct = 30
    precision = 30 / 40 = 0.75 = 75%
    true pairs = 50, found = 30
    recall = 30 / 50 = 0.6 = 60%

    Suspect metrics

    Ranking is graded by top-1 accuracy. The check is whether the first suspect on the card matches the true culprit commit.

    plaintext
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    50 labelled nights, top suspect correct on 34
    top-1 accuracy = 34 / 50 = 0.68 = 68%
    outcome split over the 50 nights:
    top-1 correct: 34 = 68%
    correct suspect in top 3 only: 9 = 18%
    culprit missed: 7 = 14%
    check: 68 + 18 + 14 = 100

    Operating the loop

    Cost is tracked per night alongside quality. Token prices below are a stated example parameter, not any real price.

    plaintext
    assume 1 million input tokens cost 3 units (example parameter, not a real price)
    one nightly pass reads 200000 tokens
    cost = 200000 / 1000000 x 3 = 0.2 x 3 = 0.6 units per night

    Common pitfall

    Grading on unlabelled nights rewards confident prose. Only labelled history with true groups and true culprits can move precision, recall, or top-1 numbers.

    Interview

    Likely probes: what each metric needs and what ships the loop.

    • Precision and recall need true pairs; top-1 needs the true culprit commit.

    • Ship on labelled gains plus a cost cap per night, not on single-night stories.

    • Re-label monthly so the history tracks the current design and flow.

    Check yourself Precision is 75% and recall is 60%. In one line each, what do they say?

    Three in four proposed pairs are true repeats. Three in five true pairs were found.

    Check yourself Top-1 accuracy is 68% across 50 nights. How many nights named the culprit first?

    34 nights. 34 divided by 50 is 0.68, which is 68%.

    Related topics

    • The nightly triage loop

    • Evaluating AI tools for your team

    Previous

    147 / 173

    Next: Lint-and-Fix Loops

    Up next

    Up nextLint-and-Fix Loops

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonReport an error

    See also

    • The Nightly Triage Loop
    • Clustering Failures by Signature
    • Ranking Suspects with Evidence