fix(v1): prefer final judge choices over draft boxes - #2465
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6def05051e
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
ApprovabilityVerdict: Not approved Macroscope's review found this PR not approvable — This small parser fix changes production judge scoring and verdict classification. Unresolved review concerns identify concrete ambiguity around prose tokens and ordering between boxed and unboxed final verdicts, so the resulting behavior needs human verification. You can add or adjust custom eligibility rules. Learn more. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 491c4789bd
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 011b6b7183
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.
❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.
Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 011b6b7. Configure here.

Overview
Prefer explicit final judge verdicts over boxed answers, so a draft boxed answer cannot mask a later final decision.
Alternative implementation to #2256.
Details
Note
Prefer final judge markers over boxed answers in
parse_judge_choiceparse_judge_choicein score.py for lines starting withFINALplusJUDGMENT|ANSWER|VERDICTfollowed immediately by a valid choice token, returning the last such match's canonical choice.verdict_reheuristics only when no explicit final-line choice is found;text_upperis recomputed after boxed extraction for the legacy path.Final Judgment:line now resolve to the explicit line instead of the box; outputs relying solely on boxed answers are unaffected.Macroscope summarized 59239af.