roampal
- Baseline RAG (embedding similarity only): 10%
- RAG + reranker: 20%
- Outcomes only (no reranker): 60%
- RAG + outcome scoring (mature memories with 20+ uses): 60%
"Accuracy" = correct memory ranked #1 for the query. The outcome scoring uses Wilson score lower bound - memories that consistently get positive feedback from the "user" get boosted, ones that fail get demoted.
Test methodology: https://github.com/roampal-ai/roampal/blob/main/dev/benchmar...
RAG accuracy jumped from 10% to 60% when I added outcome scoring
I made Claude Code learn from its mistakes
Run whatever benchmarks you have. I would love to see how it stacks up against RL methods.
Ping me if you need help with anything.
Thanks!
Thorndike's Law of Effect is the entire reason I built the outcome-scoring (+0.2 for worked, −0.3 for failed) and shift weighting toward proven memories. You're not half-baked — you're 100% right. I just happened to ship the PoC first.
Would love to hear your take on the cold-start problem and whether those reward magnitudes feel right in practice. Shooting you a connection request on LinkedIn if you want to swap notes.
Show HN: Roampal – a local memory layer that learns from outcomes
https://github.com/roampal-ai/roampal
Matthew McConaughey was on Joe Rogan two months ago describing the exact AI he wanted: a private model trained only on his own writings and experiences. I built it — and added outcome-based learning.On 130 adversarial scenarios designed so the query semantically matches bad advice better than good advice:→ plain vector search: 0–3% correct→ Roampal: 100% correctEfficiency: 63% fewer tokens —...