Engineering notebookDecision 01 / System observability

Architecture Decision · 01

Defining traceability across the system

Why this decision matters

The same recall miss could originate at several different stages.

ML systems are, by design, non-deterministic, which makes debugging even more pernicious than with typical software. Originally, a final number could not distinguish absent signal, a discarded candidate, incoherent composition, a wrong identity, or an incorrect evaluator. Without stage evidence, “recall fell” gives no guidance about whether to collect data, retrain a model, repair downstream logic, or correct the metric. One symptom → several possible causes → different interventions.

Illustrating the Concept Simplified and white-labeled · not the production architecture
End metric

“Did the system succeed?”

Useful for measuring outcomes, but it collapses every causal path into the same final miss.

Persisted trace · chosen

“Where and why did it stop succeeding?”

Stable identity, inputs, outputs, parameters, and dispositions turn a failure into a bounded diagnosis.

Requirements-driven question

Should a multi-stage system record only its final answer—or preserve enough evidence to explain every material handoff and rejection?

Alternative 01

End metric only

Cheapest to operate and easiest to summarize, but it proves only that a miss occurred—not which system decision caused it.

Alternative 02

Post-hoc reconstruction

Flexible for occasional debugging, but runtime thresholds, eliminated candidates, and source identity are often incomplete after the fact.

Chosen approach

Persisted stage trace

Record first-class evidence when it is produced, carry it forward, and preserve why each candidate survives or disappears.

Evidence that pushed the decision

The correct local evidence often existed before the final system failed.

Stage-level attribution separated missing signal from thresholding, admission, composition, classification, and evaluator errors. That changed the justified intervention and prevented model retraining from becoming the default response.

Tradeoff accepted

Diagnostic power requires a larger evidence contract.

Stable IDs, stage dispositions, resolved parameters, geometry, and source identity increase schema, storage, instrumentation, and acceptance-testing cost. The payoff is causal debugging and repeatable evaluation.

Current status

Traceability is treated as a system contract: persist first-class evidence at its first producer, propagate it downstream, and record why candidates survive or disappear.

Re-evaluate when

Extend the trace whenever a repeated failure cannot be attributed from persisted evidence. Reduce granularity only when measured operational cost outweighs diagnostic value; never remove stable identity, source provenance, or stage disposition.