bi-01 — Analysis

What this module is actually training

Not knowledge of Chromium. Convergence of search. The measurable output is: given a browser behaviour you have never investigated, how many queries until you are reading the right code, and do you notice when you are in the wrong subsystem?

Required invariants of a good navigation

  1. The prediction is made before the search. Naming the expected subsystem first is what turns a search into a calibration measurement. A search without a prediction teaches nothing about your model.
  2. Zero hits is information, not failure. It means one of: generated code, wrong subsystem, wrong spelling of a term of art, or the feature is flag-gated. Broadening to a soup of common words discards that information.
  3. Callers and callees come from cross-references, never from reading. Gate questions 3 and 4 have a mechanical answer; inferring them from nearby code is how wrong call graphs get written down and repeated.
  4. The query is recorded, not the path. Paths rot — this repository has two dated instances (ng_ prefixes, TraceWrapperMember). Queries transfer across subsystems and across years.

Failure modes

FailureSymptomCorrection
Concept instead of token"layout" returns tens of thousands of hitsconvert to symbol: or a spec phrase
Wrong layertwo hours in //content for Blink internalsanswer "which process?" before searching
Assuming dead code"this is never called"check generated code, .mojom, feature flags
Depth-first descentfour hours in //base/containerskeep a deferred list; stop when the answer stops changing
Trusting a remembered pathconfidently wrongcheck the date in the verification log

What would falsify the approach

If spec-phrase search failed on spec-defined subsystems, Technique 1 would be worthless. It does not, and the reason is structural: Blink quotes specification step text in comments, which makes the specification a search index over the implementation. That property is why the parsing lab is tractable on day one with no build.

The technique degrades precisely where there is no spec — compositor, scheduler, GPU. There the naming grammar (Technique 3) and the trace-event bridge (bi-12) take over. Knowing which technique applies to which subsystem is the actual skill.

Evidence this module produces

  • a query log with failures included
  • a prediction-accuracy count out of 8
  • one candidate failing WPT recorded for bi-14
  • the three techniques that worked best for you, which differ by person more than people expect