lora-lite/docs/audit/REVIEW_PROMPT_VARIANTS.md

Per-variant paper-faithfulness audit for lora-lite

You are reviewing a small from-scratch PEFT library (lora-lite) that re-implements 6 LoRA variants. Your job: independent paper-vs-implementation sign-off for each.

Inputs available locally

• Code: src/lora_lite/variants/{lora,pissa,dora,ia3,hra,delora}.py
• Adapter base + plumbing: src/lora_lite/{adapter.py,target.py,variant.py,config.py}
• Papers (extracted text): docs/papers/{lora,pissa,dora,ia3,hra,delora}_*.txt
• Smoke log (toy + bnb): logs/smoke.log
• Real-model probe log (Qwen0.6B, 16 SGD steps): logs/qwen_probe.log
• Reference implementations (peft / antipasto3 / baukit): docs/refs/*.py

What I want from you (per variant, all 6)

For each of lora, pissa, dora, ia3, hra, delora produce a section with:

1. Paper claim summary (1-3 sentences) — cite paper file + section/eq number. E.g. "PiSSA (docs/papers/pissa_2404.02948.txt §3.1, eq.4): A,B = top-r SVD of W, W_res = W - BA; trains A,B with W_res frozen."

2. What our code does — point to the function and key lines in src/lora_lite/variants/<v>.py. Quote ≤5 lines.

3. Match? Y / Partial / N — explicit verdict. If Partial, state the deviation and whether it is documented in the variant's docstring.

4. Smoke evidence — quote the exact row from logs/smoke.log (toy + bnb) and the row from logs/qwen_probe.log. State whether the numbers are consistent with paper expectations (e.g. PiSSA should have nonzero perturb at t=0 because B@A reconstructs W; LoRA/HRA/IA3/DeLoRA should be identity at t=0).

5. Bugs / concerns — anything actually wrong, especially:

   • Gradient flow issues
   • Wrong normalization / scaling
   • Wrong initialization (e.g. PiSSA without SVD, HRA without orthogonality)
   • Missing or wrong save/load handling
   • Numerical issues (dtype, in-place ops on grad-required tensors)

6. Confidence — High / Medium / Low, with one-line reason.

Final aggregate

After the 6 sections, produce a Markdown table:

| variant | paper match | smoke pass | qwen pass | bugs found | confidence |

And a 3-bullet "biggest risks" summary.

Rules

• Be skeptical. The previous audit found IA3, HRA, DeLoRA bugs that had been declared "OK". Assume nothing.
• If the smoke log does not include a check that you'd want to see, flag it as a missing test — don't infer correctness from absence.
• Quote evidence; do not paraphrase code.
• Use file links: src/lora_lite/variants/lora.py:42 style.
• Do NOT edit code. Output is a verdict only.
• If you cannot determine something from the available files, say so explicitly rather than guessing.

Write the full review to stdout. I will redirect to a file.