Review Route Guide¶

Guide Maps¶

graph LR
  family["Reproducible Research"]
  program["Deep Dive DVC"]
  guide["Capstone docs"]
  section["Docs"]
  page["Review Route Guide"]
  proof["Proof route"]

  family --> program --> guide --> section --> page
  page -.checks against.-> proof

flowchart LR
  orient["Read the guide boundary"] --> inspect["Inspect the named files, targets, or artifacts"]
  inspect --> run["Run the confirm, demo, selftest, or proof command"]
  run --> compare["Compare output with the stated contract"]
  compare --> review["Return to the course claim with evidence"]

Use this guide when route choice itself is becoming noise. The goal is not to memorize targets. The goal is to match each state or release question to the smallest honest evidence surface.

Choose by question¶

If the question is about...	Start here	Escalate if needed
declared versus recorded stage truth	`make stage-summary`	`make verify`
promoted population facts	`make profile-summary`	`make verify-report`
promoted scoring behavior	`make model-summary`	`make release-review`
promoted inventory and release metadata	`make manifest-summary`	`make release-review`
borderline decisions near the threshold	`make threshold-review`	`make release-review`
concrete misclassifications	`make review-queue` and `publish/v1/predictions.csv`	`make release-review`
whether the promoted contract currently passes	`make verify`	`make verify-report`
saved contract evidence plus enforcement logic	`make verify-report`	`make confirm`
downstream trust in the promoted release boundary	`make release-review`	`make confirm`
remote-backed restoration after local loss	`make recovery-review`	`make confirm`
first-read orientation through the repository	`make walkthrough`	`make tour`
broader executed proof across repository state	`make tour`	`make confirm`

Escalation rules¶

start with one summary command when the question is narrow
use make verify when the question becomes contract validity
use make verify-report, make release-review, or make recovery-review when the answer must survive later inspection
use make confirm only when the whole repository story is under pressure

What this guide prevents¶

defaulting to confirm when a smaller route would answer the question more cleanly
using release review when the question is still only about stage truth
using one promoted metric as a substitute for profile, model, or record-level review
treating recovery review as if it replaced ordinary release review