SDE 级联
使用两级结构化数据提取级联(mini → 验证 → 推理),以极低的成本获得大型推理模型的大部分质量。
概述
大型推理模型擅长提取结构化数据,但速度慢且成本高
小模型便宜,但会犯错
级联能以极低成本获得大部分质量
我们使用的模型及其价格(每 100 万 token 的美元数,输入 / 输出;标准费率核对于 2026 年 9 月 15 日):
第 0 级(mini):
gpt-5.4-mini,价格 \$0.75 / \$4.50第 1 级(推理):
gpt-5.5,价格 \$5.00 / \$30.00(约为 mini 的 7 倍)验证器:TypeSafe
jev-1.12,价格 \$0.042 / \$0.00(输出 token 免费;已公布的 Jev 定价)
算法
使用便宜/小型模型进行提取。
使用 TypeSafe 原语进行验证:逐字段的"是/否"("Noul 问题")问题
(例如"该值在源文本中是否缺失?"、"它是否是从无关文本中搬来的?"),每个问题都返回 P(有问题)。
如果验证器信号触发,则升级到昂贵的推理模型;否则保留便宜的答案。
本实战指南
完整走一遍一个真实示例,然后展示跨 100 个提示词的权衡
注意:两个提取层级使用 OpenAI 的文本模式
我们不使用结构化输出、工具调用或 json 模式,原因是:
模式遵循类错误并不是我们预期 LLM 会犯的那种错误(为此制造合成数据很容易)
如果 LLM 确实没能遵循 schema,那几乎总是意味着它非常混乱,所以受限解码解决不了底层问题
不过我们鼓励你亲自试试它们!
设置
安装依赖(TypeSafe 验证器客户端由 TypeSafe 的包索引提供):
pip install openai datasets jsonschema ipython 'cooksafe>=0.2.0,<0.3.0'然后在你的环境中设置
OPENAI_API_KEY和TYPESAFE_API_KEY
import json
import os
from pathlib import Path
import jsonschema
from cooksafe import JsonCache, make_playground_link
from datasets import load_dataset
from IPython.display import Markdown, display
from openai import OpenAI
from typesafe_sdk import Noul, NoulCriteria, TypeSafeClient
MINI = "gpt-5.4-mini" # rung 0: cheap + fast
REASONING = "gpt-5.5" # rung 1: strong, run with reasoning_effort="high"
TS_MODEL = "jev-1.12" # the TypeSafe verifier model
FIRE_T = 0.7 # escalate if any per-field P(wrong) exceeds this; also the "<== FIRES" display marker
oai = OpenAI()
ts = TypeSafeClient(api_key=os.environ["TYPESAFE_API_KEY"], timeout=30.0)第 1 步:数据
我们选择一个名为 scrapegraphai 的 huggingface 数据集
SCRAPEGRAPHAI_REVISION = "4bb9fba1dff9181c5acdb60a5a26fea62fa54fe9"
row = load_dataset(
"scrapegraphai/scrapegraphai-100k",
revision=SCRAPEGRAPHAI_REVISION,
split="train",
)[516]
schema = json.loads(row["schema"])
prompt = row["prompt"]
content = row["content"]
print(
f"""
PROMPT
===========
{prompt}
SCHEMA
===========
{json.dumps(schema, indent=2)}
CONTENT
===========
{content}
""".strip()
)PROMPT
===========
Find registration open date fall semester for New York University in New York, NY for the 2024-2025 school year.
SCHEMA
===========
{
"properties": {
"registration_open_date": {
"description": "The date that registration opens for the fall semester. MUST be in the format mm/dd/yyyy. For example, for a college in the 2024-2025 school year, it might be something like 09/05/2024. Return a blank string if you are unsure.",
"title": "Registration Open Date",
"type": "string"
},
"description": {
"description": "A brief description of the registration open date. For example, 'Registration opens for the fall semester'.",
"title": "Description",
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"registration_open_date",
"description"
],
"title": "RegistrationOpen",
"type": "object"
}
CONTENT
===========
Skip to content Skip to current page navigation
[ ](https://www.nyu.edu/)
Search Site
[ ](https://www.nyu.edu/)
* [ Academics](https://www.nyu.edu/academics.html)
* [ Admissions](https://www.nyu.edu/admissions.html)
* [ Research](https://www.nyu.edu/research.html)
* [ University Life](https://www.nyu.edu/life.html)
* [ About](https://www.nyu.edu/about.html)
All NYU
# Mobile Navigation
[ ](https://www.nyu.edu/)
Search Site
* [Academics](https://www.nyu.edu/academics.html)
* [Admissions](https://www.nyu.edu/admissions.html)
* [Research](https://www.nyu.edu/research.html)
* [University Life](https://www.nyu.edu/life.html)
* [About](https://www.nyu.edu/about.html)
All NYU
Info for
* Back to main menu
* Info for
* [Students](https://www.nyu.edu/students.html)
* [Faculty](https://www.nyu.edu/faculty.html)
* [Alumni](https://www.nyu.edu/alumni.html)
* [Employees](https://www.nyu.edu/employees.html)
* [Community](https://www.nyu.edu/community.html)
[Log In](http://home.nyu.edu/)
Info for
* [Students](https://www.nyu.edu/students.html)
* [Faculty](https://www.nyu.edu/faculty.html)
* [Alumni](https://www.nyu.edu/alumni.html)
* [Employees](https://www.nyu.edu/employees.html)
* [Community](https://www.nyu.edu/community.html)
[Log In](https://home.nyu.edu/)
Search Site Search
# Events Calendar
Search Events
Apply Reset
* [About the Events Calendar ](https://www.nyu.edu/employees/resources-and-services/media-and-communications/digital-communications/university-events-calendar.html)
* [Events Calendar Tutorial ](https://www.nyu.edu/employees/resources-and-services/media-and-communications/digital-communications/university-events-calendar/tutorials.html)
* [Report issue or provide feedback ](https://nyu.service-now.com/sp?id=sc_cat_item&sys_id=7698dd2a98bcf4004c8c03063d84e274)
Search Filters Calendar
New York University
Equal Opportunity and Non-Discrimination at NYU - New York University is committed to maintaining an environment that encourages and fosters respect for individual values and appropriate conduct among all persons. In all University spaces--physical and digital--programming, activities, and events are carried out in accordance with applicable law as well as University policy, which includes but is not limited to its Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy.
Unless otherwise noted, all content copyright New York University. All rights reserved.
* [Search](https://search.nyu.edu/)
* [Campus Map](https://www.nyu.edu/map.html)
* [Events](https://events.nyu.edu/)
* [Contact Us](https://www.nyu.edu/contact-us.html)
* [Give](https://www.nyu.edu/about/giving.html)
* [Copyright & Fair Use](https://www.nyu.edu/copyright-and-fair-use.html)
* [Privacy](https://www.nyu.edu/privacy.html)
* [Accessibility](https://www.nyu.edu/accessibility.html)
* [Feedback](https://www.nyu.edu/#feedback.html)
* [New York Campus](https://www.nyu.edu/)
* [Abu Dhabi Campus](https://nyuad.nyu.edu/)
* [Shanghai Campus](https://shanghai.nyu.edu/)
* [](https://facebook.com/)
* [](https://linkedin.com/)
* [](https://x.com/)
* [](https://instagram.com/)
* [](https://youtube.com/)这一行是一个 NYU 活动日历页面("Fall 2024 Census Date"):
schema 只要求两个字段:
registration_open_date和description抓取得到的提示词只包含日历导航和样板文字:没有注册日期,也没有描述
注意 schema 的
description字段甚至在它自己的字段描述里自带一个示例值("Registration opens for the fall semester")
因此,一个行为良好的提取器应该拒绝编造页面中不存在的字段
看看小模型会不会做正确的事吧!
第 2 步:用 mini 模型提取(文本模式)
注意:
gpt-5.4-mini在这个输入上非常随机——即使在temperature=0下,它几乎每次运行都会编造一个不同的description。为了让这篇演练可复现,我们硬编码了本笔记本其余部分要解释的那一次典型编造(验证器以 P(wrong) > 0.8 标记了它)。真实的流水线会直接调用extract(MINI, prompt, schema, content, temperature=0)。
EXTRACT_SYSTEM = (
"You extract structured data from documents. Return only values supported by the text. "
"Follow any value format specified by the schema or its field descriptions."
)
# LLM and TypeSafe calls are cached to ``json_cache.json``, which ships with the cookbook, so
# re-rendering reproduces the published results with no API spend; delete the file to re-run live.
json_cache = JsonCache(Path("json_cache.json"))
@json_cache
def extract(
model: str,
prompt: str,
schema: dict,
content: str,
*,
reasoning_effort: str | None = None,
temperature: float | None = None,
) -> dict:
user = (
f"{prompt}\n\nReturn ONLY a JSON object matching this JSON Schema:\n"
f"{json.dumps(schema, indent=2)}\n\nDocument:\n{content}"
)
kwargs = {
"model": model,
"messages": [
{"role": "system", "content": EXTRACT_SYSTEM},
{"role": "user", "content": user},
],
}
if reasoning_effort:
kwargs["reasoning_effort"] = reasoning_effort
if temperature is not None:
kwargs["temperature"] = temperature
text = oai.chat.completions.create(**kwargs).choices[0].message.content
# The prompt asks for ONLY a JSON object, so parse the reply as-is -- no regex fishing a
# substring out of a malformed reply. If ``json.loads`` fails, treat it as an empty extraction
# (the record-level analog of NaN): every field reads as absent, which the verifier flags and the
# gate escalates -- the safe direction. Schema-following errors are rare here (see the overview).
try:
return json.loads(text)
except (ValueError, json.JSONDecodeError):
return {}
# Hard-coded canonical fabrication (see note above); a real pipeline would use extract(MINI, prompt, schema, content, temperature=0).
mini_record = {
"registration_open_date": "",
"description": "Registration opens for the fall semester",
}
print("mini extraction:\n", json.dumps(mini_record, indent=2))
# The record is a perfect fit for the JSON Schema -- and still wrong. Schema validation is necessary
# but not sufficient: it catches structural errors, never semantic ones. That gap is the whole point.
print("\nschema-valid:", jsonschema.Draft202012Validator(schema).is_valid(mini_record))mini extraction:
{
"registration_open_date": "",
"description": "Registration opens for the fall semester"
}
schema-valid: True这条记录是 schema 有效的(上一行打印
True),但它是错的:registration_open_date留空,这与页面相符:页面没有给出任何日期但
description是编造的:页面从未描述过注册日期,于是 mini 编造了一个看似合理的值。它可能照搬 schema 自己的示例"Registration opens for the fall semester",或者叙述"...was not found in the document"JSON-Schema 检查看不到这一点。便宜的模型会产生这种自信且满足 schema 的编造,而抓住它们正是语义验证器的职责
第 3 步:用 TypeSafe 验证
验证器是 TypeSafe;我们为每个字段构建一个
Noul问题:一个狭窄的是/否问题,框架设定为
true= 有问题(升级)
TypeSafe 在一次 system_one 调用中为每个问题返回经过校准的
noul=P(true)问题集:
一个整体性的
__overall__::judge头("这条记录该升级吗?")。我们计算并展示它,是为了把整条记录的判断与逐字段头作对比,但第 4 步的门控并不使用它——升级由逐字段问题组驱动。一组逐字段问题
非空字段获得完整的头集合
空字段(null / "" / [])只获得
absence_wrong头
(完整流水线还有一个针对整体容器的
spurious头和一个整体difficulty分数;此处未展示,以便这篇演练只聚焦两个门控头)
TypeSafe 之道:分解
注意一切都是以程序化方式分解的,这就是 TypeSafe 的方式。
分解让每个提示词的智能最大化,并使算法可调、可解释。

# metric -> (question, NoulCriteria)
MAIN_QUESTIONS = {
"name_desc_mismatch": (
"Does the `extracted_field` fail to match the field at `path` or the `description` in the "
"`field_spec`? If the `description` is empty, judge against the `path` alone.",
NoulCriteria(
true="the `extracted_field` does not match the field name or its `description`",
false="the `extracted_field` matches the field name and `description`",
),
),
"type_mismatch": (
"Does the `extracted_field` violate the `type` declared in the `field_spec`?",
NoulCriteria(
true="the `extracted_field` violates the declared `type`",
false="the `extracted_field` conforms to the declared `type`",
),
),
"unreasonable": (
"Is the `extracted_field` one that a reasonable person would not have extracted for this "
"`field_spec`?",
NoulCriteria(
true="a reasonable person would not have extracted this value",
false="the extraction is reasonable",
),
),
"hallucinated": (
"Is the `extracted_field` unsupported by, or absent from, the source text?",
NoulCriteria(
true="the `extracted_field` is a hallucination -- not supported by, or absent "
"from, the source text",
false="the `extracted_field` is supported by the source text",
),
),
"off_target": (
"Does the source text fail to genuinely report the thing the `field_spec` describes, so the "
"value was pulled from incidental text?",
NoulCriteria(
true="the source does not genuinely provide this field -- the value was pulled "
"from incidental text",
false="the source genuinely reports this field",
),
),
"incomplete": (
"Does the `extracted_field` fail to capture a value the source supports (note whether the "
"`field_spec` is `required`)?",
NoulCriteria(
true="the field is wrongly empty, null, or missing a value the source supports",
false="the field captures the value the source supports",
),
),
"format_violation": (
"Does the `extracted_field` violate the format or constraints implied by the `description`, "
"the schema `type`, and the extraction instructions (e.g. date format, units, enum membership)?",
NoulCriteria(
true="the `extracted_field` violates the implied format or constraints",
false="the `extracted_field` satisfies the format and constraints",
),
),
}
ABSENCE_QUESTION = (
"The `extracted_field` is empty, null, or an empty collection. Does the source text contain the "
"information the `field_spec` describes, making the empty result wrong?"
)
ABSENCE_CRITERIA = NoulCriteria(
true="a value was wrongly omitted", false="returning nothing is correct"
)
# The pipeline also asks one holistic, whole-record head: "should this be escalated?"
OVERALL_JUDGE = (
"Is this extracted record an incorrect extraction -- some value unsupported by the source or "
"not conforming to the schema, required information missing or wrong, or some field hallucinated -- "
"so it should be escalated to a smarter model?"
)
OVERALL_JUDGE_CRITERIA = NoulCriteria(
true="the record is an incorrect extraction",
false="the record is a correct extraction",
)
def is_empty(v) -> bool:
return v is None or (isinstance(v, (str, list, dict)) and len(v) == 0)
def field_spec(name: str) -> dict:
"""Minimal spec pulled from the schema (unwrapping anyOf/null for optional fields)."""
p = schema["properties"][name]
branches = p.get("anyOf") or []
typ = p.get("type") or next(
(b["type"] for b in branches if b.get("type") != "null"), "unknown"
)
return {
"path": name,
"type": typ,
"description": p.get("description", ""),
"required": name in schema.get("required", []),
}
def build_questions(record: dict) -> dict[str, Noul]:
"""The verify question set: one holistic ``__overall__::judge`` head plus a per-field battery,
keyed ``field::metric`` (mirrors build_verify_prompts)."""
questions: dict[str, Noul] = {
"__overall__::judge": Noul(
instructions=OVERALL_JUDGE, criteria=OVERALL_JUDGE_CRITERIA
),
}
for name, value in record.items():
spec = field_spec(name)
if is_empty(value):
questions[f"{name}::absence_wrong"] = Noul(
instructions={
"field_spec": spec,
"extracted_field": value,
"main_question": ABSENCE_QUESTION,
},
criteria=ABSENCE_CRITERIA,
)
continue
for metric, (question, criteria) in MAIN_QUESTIONS.items():
if metric == "type_mismatch" and spec["type"] == "unknown":
continue
questions[f"{name}::{metric}"] = Noul(
instructions={
"field_spec": spec,
"extracted_field": value,
"main_question": question,
},
criteria=criteria,
)
return questions
@json_cache
def verify(record: dict) -> dict[str, float | str]:
"""Run the whole Noul battery over a record in one TypeSafe call; return ``{field::metric: P(true)}``."""
state = {
"system_message": EXTRACT_SYSTEM,
"instruction": "Extract the structured record from this document",
"source_text": row["content"],
"schema": schema,
"extraction": record,
}
questions = build_questions(record)
answers = ts.system_one(state=state, questions=questions, model=TS_MODEL).answers
return {qid: ans.noul for qid, ans in answers.items()} | {
"playground_link": make_playground_link(state, questions)
}对 mini 的提取结果运行整个问题组
checks = verify(mini_record)
playground_link = checks.pop("playground_link")
display(
Markdown(
f"🔗 [Open this verification in the TypeSafe playground]({playground_link})"
)
)
print(f"{'qid':<40}{'P(wrong)':>9}")
print("-" * 50)
for fld, p in sorted(checks.items(), key=lambda c: -c[-1]):
flag = " <== FIRES" if p > FIRE_T else ""
print(f"{fld:<40}{p:>9.2f}{flag}")qid P(wrong)
--------------------------------------------------
description::hallucinated 0.95 <== FIRES
description::off_target 0.85 <== FIRES
description::unreasonable 0.58
__overall__::judge 0.56
description::incomplete 0.16
registration_open_date::absence_wrong 0.14
description::format_violation 0.10
description::name_desc_mismatch 0.08
description::type_mismatch 0.02TypeSafe 把信号集中在真正出错的字段上。
我们的结果是校准的:在出错的字段上高,在正确的字段上低,在看起来不对劲却并未明确出错的字段上中等
这就是一个 typesafe 验证器相比直白的"这整件事好不好?"评判器能带给你的东西
第 4 步:升级门控
现在我们以
any_flag作为门控:只要任何字段标志超过FIRE_T(0.7,在上方设置,并与第 3 步的<== FIRES标记共用)就升级这是一个
max式门控(任何字段触发就升级),而不是取均值,所以一个自信的红旗就足以触发升级,不会被平均成无声
# any_flag is a per-field gate: the holistic __overall__ head is shown above but not part of it
fired = {
qid: p
for qid, p in checks.items()
if not qid.startswith("__overall__") and p > FIRE_T
}
escalate = bool(fired)
print(
f"any_flag gate (threshold {FIRE_T}): {'ESCALATE' if escalate else 'ACCEPT cheap result'}"
)
for qid, p in sorted(fired.items(), key=lambda c: -c[1]):
print(f" fired: {qid} (P={p:.2f})")any_flag gate (threshold 0.7): ESCALATE
fired: description::hallucinated (P=0.95)
fired: description::off_target (P=0.85)第 5 步:升级到推理模型
既然有信号触发,我们就为强模型(gpt-5.5,reasoning_effort="high")付费
final_record = (
extract(REASONING, prompt, schema, content, reasoning_effort="high")
if escalate
else mini_record
)
print("mini :", json.dumps(mini_record))
print("reasoning :", json.dumps(final_record))
print("\nfield-level diff (mini -> final):")
for name in mini_record:
if mini_record[name] != final_record.get(name):
print(f" {name}: {mini_record[name]!r} -> {final_record.get(name)!r}")mini : {"registration_open_date": "", "description": "Registration opens for the fall semester"}
reasoning : {"description": "", "registration_open_date": ""}
field-level diff (mini -> final):
description: 'Registration opens for the fall semester' -> ''改进之处
推理模型丢弃了编造的
description,返回""它识别出页面从未描述注册日期,并拒绝编造一个
级联把一个自信且满足 schema 的编造变成了一个诚实的空字段
而它只在这一个条目上花了推理模型的钱,正是因为验证器让它这么做的
第 6 步:在 100 个提示词上的表现
这些是 TypeSafe 的内部结果,用上述通用方法得出:
同样的
extract → verify → escalate循环,gpt-5.4-mini → gpt-5.5-reasoning,作用于逐字段头之上的any_flag门控,在 100 个 scrapegraphai 提示词上运行每个条目的便宜层级提取由 TypeSafe 打分;门控阈值("cut")从 0 扫到 1,得到的每个配置都绘制在(成本,质量)空间中
该图是历史快照;其成本并未按上面列出的当前 Jev 费率重新计算

如何解读:
黑色菱形 = 四个模型各自单独运行(成本随能力攀升;最强的
gpt-5.5-reasoning位于右上角,质量约 0.81,成本约 \$0.10/次提取)蓝色点 = 处于许多门控阈值上的级联;虚线是 pareto 前沿
级联前沿位于每个单一模型的左上方:扫动门控就能以顶级模型的一小部分成本获得其大部分质量
便宜层级近乎免费地处理容易的条目,只有被标记的条目才为推理模型付费
附录 A:什么造就一个好的验证器信号
级联的好坏取决于其验证器;区分有用信号与无用信号的是:
狭窄且有据。
针对一个字段、对照源文本的一个可检验的是/否问题(例如"该值在源文本中是否缺失?"),而不是模糊的"这次提取好吗?"
模糊的问题给出糊状、未校准的分数
坏 = TRUE,并附有明确判据。
将每个问题的框架设定为升级情形对应
true情形,并说明true/false各自的含义
逐字段,然后用
max聚合。逐字段标志可以定位错误,并保持稀疏而有力
max("任何标志触发")确保一个自信的红旗就能触发升级,而不是被平均成无声
独立且便宜。
由专门的验证器(这里是 TypeSafe)评判输出,能抓住提取器自身的盲点
它必须便宜,否则就无节省可言
有区分度 / 已校准。
好的信号在真实错误上高、在正确结果上低,因此单个阈值就能干净地分开"接受"与"升级"
正是这种区分度把 pareto 曲线推向左上方