Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Collect historical scores, fit saturation curves, detect inflection points
.claude/skills/yogsoth-ai-score-trajectory-analysis/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 87% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 14% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 93% | 0% |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 521% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 124% | 0% |
Collect historical SOTA scores for a benchmark, arrange as time-series, fit saturation curves, and detect inflection points indicating phase transitions in benchmark difficulty.
Gather historical scores from multiple sources to build comprehensive timeline.
Sources (search in order):
Per data point, collect:
Minimum: 10 data points spanning at least 2 years.
Fit multiple saturation models to the SOTA envelope:
Report goodness-of-fit (R-squared) for each model. Select best-fit.
Classify benchmark status:
Detect inflection points:
yamltrajectory: benchmark: string metric: string data_points: int time_span: string sota_envelope: - {date, score, model, source} best_fit_model: logistic|exponential|linear|piecewise fit_r_squared: float saturation_status: pre-saturation|approaching|saturated|supersaturated headroom: float inflection_points: - {date, type: acceleration|deceleration|step, cause: string} estimated_ceiling: float time_to_ceiling: string
| Metric | Minimum | |--------|---------| | Data points collected | 10 | | Sources consulted | 3 | | Curve models fitted | 3 | | Saturation classification produced | 1 |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→pass | 21,456 | 30,496 | +42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,203 | 5,981 | +87% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 25,205 | 38,269 | +52% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,070 | 4,641 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 26,960 | 28,896 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,549 | 2,203 | -60% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 19,563 | 18,025 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,654 | 3,173 | +20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | 25,431 | 19,810 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,336 | 1,298 | -61% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | 44,175 | 40,529 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,209 | 8,913 | +9% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | 15,595 | 42,624 | +173% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,680 | 6,584 | +292% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 30,263 | 22,387 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,917 | 4,199 | +7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | 12,926 | 38,282 | +196% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,429 | 7,550 | +211% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 32,331 | 43,417 | +34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,713 | 8,925 | +89% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 29,217 | 50,801 | +74% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,921 | 7,579 | +93% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 14,825 | 6,523 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,401 | 1,694 | +21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | 18,855 | 35,444 | +88% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,670 | 6,963 | +161% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | 14,245 | 20,956 | +47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,162 | 1,531 | -29% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | 11,809 | 24,898 | +111% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 644 | 4,765 | +640% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 20,578 | 33,400 | +62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,254 | 5,560 | +147% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | 17,407 | 29,836 | +71% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,753 | 5,359 | +95% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 7,910 | 14,994 | +90% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 418 | 2,596 | +521% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 42,080 | 25,500 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,155 | 4,828 | +124% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | 11,221 | 10,981 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,050 | 1,881 | +79% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 22,190 | 18,788 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,031 | 3,240 | +7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 21,462 | 23,793 | +11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,705 | 3,858 | +43% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 19 counted toward the lift figure. The other 3 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +23 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 19 comparable cases. 2 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.