ComfyUI-Prompt-Calibrator/docs/CALIBRATION_POLICY.md

Calibration policy — the agent's playbook

The local Qwen3-VL judge only observes and scores — it does not propose fixes. The external agent (you / a stronger model) decides every correction. So the judge's job is to hand the agent the range of information needed to calibrate, and the agent's job is to turn that into prompt edits.

What the agent needs from each comparison (the information model)

To move a generated image toward a reference, for every dimension the prompt controls the agent needs three things:

field	meaning	why the agent needs it
ref	what the reference shows on this axis	the target — what to steer the prompt toward
gen	what the generated image shows	the current state — what to change
verdict	match / partial / mismatch	which axes to fix first (mismatch → partial → match)

That's the whole signal: target, current, distance. The agent corrects by rewriting the prompt so gen → ref on the axes that differ.

Model capability is the critical path. Garbage descriptions in → garbage calibration out. The 4B is too weak for fine-grained NSFW recognition: it mislabels the verdict (central-tendency bias toward partial) AND mis-identifies content — it will confidently call a position "doggy" or "cowgirl" when it is neither. It's only reliable for coarse attributes (subject count, nude/clothed, photoreal vs anime, broad scene). For anything fine-grained — named positions, limb arrangement, gaze, hair detail — use the 30B (model_path=30b-a3b, precision=nf4). The node corrects the trivially-wrong verdicts (identical ref==gen → match), but it cannot fix a wrong description; only a more capable model can.

Grounded geometry, not named labels. Naming a position (doggy/cowgirl) is unreliable even at 30B — the named-label axis was removed. The pose cluster is now purely observable geometry (body_orientation incl. who faces where, limb_arrangement, contact_points, pose); compose a named position yourself from those primitives if you need one. Geometry survives the model far better than the abstraction.

The axes must span what the prompt can express — you can only fix what the prompt can say, and each diff must map to a lever. The default set (configurable on the node) is grouped below.

Axes (default set — edit axes on the node to taste)

• Identity / cast: subject_count, gender_mix, age_appearance, ethnicity_skin
• Body: body_type, breast_size, distinctive_features (tattoos/piercings/marks), hair
• Wardrobe: clothing_state (degree of undress + garments)
• Action / pose (granular, observable geometry — no named labels): sexual_act, body_orientation (who on top/bottom/side + which way each faces), limb_arrangement (legs spread/raised, hands), penetration (type/depth/angle), contact_points, genital_visibility, pose (torso/head lean, arch)
• Affect: facial_expression, gaze
• Camera: framing (shot/crop), camera_angle (POV/angle)
• Render: scene, lighting_color, art_style

Each axis carries a one-line definition in the prompt (so e.g. gender_mix is a count, not a position). Coarse axes blur the differences that matter for adult imagery; the act / pose cluster is split into many axes so the agent gets specific, actionable targets.

Analysis profiles (pick the axis set for the act)

A discrete verdict collapses magnitude, and a generic axis can hide the very thing you're calibrating: for a blowjob, sexual_act reads "oral" in both ref and gen → MATCH, even if in the gen the head is 20 cm from the penis. So the judge has analysis profiles — act- specialized axis sets whose act-critical axes are distance/proximity-aware:

profile	adds (beyond the shared identity/body/render base)
general	sexual_act, body_orientation, limb_arrangement, penetration, contact_points, genital_visibility, pose
oral	mouth_genital_contact, mouth_genital_distance (touching / <5cm / 10–20cm / >20cm), oral_depth (tip/half/throat), tongue, hand_on_shaft, gaze_up
penetration	insertion_depth (tip/shallow/half/hilt), insertion_angle, body_orientation, limb_arrangement, …
handjob	hand_on_shaft, grip_style, stroke_position (base/mid/tip), mouth_genital_contact, …
solo	self_touch_location, toy_use, insertion_depth, …

Now "mouth on the tip" vs "head 20 cm away" is a concrete, scored difference (mouth_genital_distance: mismatch ref:[contact] gen:[far >20cm]) — the magnitude lives in the ref/gen text. Set profile on the node (or agent_bridge.py --profile oral), or override entirely with a custom axes list. Profiles are easy to extend in PROFILES/AXIS_DEFS in nodes/qwen_judge.py.

Step 0 — first pass (describe / bootstrap)

The very first iteration has no generated image yet, so the judge runs in describe mode: it looks at the reference alone and emits one canonical scene description — a coherent, internally-consistent paragraph plus a per-axis target spec. That seeds everything and becomes the fixed reference for the whole loop:

python agent_bridge.py --mode describe --workflow workflow/workflow_describe_api.json \
  --run-tag seed --analysis-dir <report_dir>

→ calib_seed.json = {"mode":"describe", "description":"…", "axes":{axis:value,…}, "canonical_reference":"…"}

The agent takes description as the initial prompt and axes as the initial axis_state. Crucially, the compare loop then anchors on this canonical reference (via --ref-desc-file) instead of re-reading the reference image every iteration — so the ref side never drifts or contradicts itself across passes; only the generated image is re-described each turn.

Per-iteration algorithm (greedy per-axis hill-climb)

best = -1 ; best_state = initial_state ; stale = 0 ; i = 0
loop:
  i += 1
  prompt = render(state)                       # state = current value per axis
  report = run agent_bridge.py --prompt prompt --negative state.negative
                               --seed state.seed --run-tag iter{i}
                               --ref-desc-file <report_dir>/calib_seed.json   # anchor on canonical ref
                               --workflow wf.json --analysis-dir <report_dir>
  if report.mismatch_count == 0 and report.overall_score >= TARGET:
      stop("converged", state)                 # TARGET e.g. 0.9 (mostly match)
  if report.overall_score > best:
      best = report.overall_score ; best_state = state ; stale = 0
  else:
      stale += 1 ; state = best_state          # revert the change that didn't help
  if stale >= PATIENCE or i >= MAX_ITERS: stop("plateau/budget", best_state)

  worst = a `mismatch` axis (else a `partial` axis) from report.axes
  target_value = report.axes[worst].ref         # what the reference shows
  state = apply(best_state, worst, edit_toward(target_value))   # change ONE axis

edit_toward(ref) is the agent's own reasoning: translate the reference value into prompt wording for that axis (e.g. gen:[missionary] → ref:[doggy style] ⇒ set the position phrase to "doggy style"). No machine-supplied fix list — the agent owns this step.

Rules that matter

1. Change one axis per iteration — clean attribution of the delta. Batch two only when both are mismatch and clearly independent.
2. Freeze seed while searching — the score must reflect the prompt, not sampler noise. Vary the seed only after converging, to confirm robustness.
3. Always edit from best_state, never from a worse last state.
4. Prioritize mismatch axes, then partial. Steer toward ref; if the obvious wording doesn't flip the verdict, try an alternative phrasing before moving on.
5. Trust the verdict + the ref/gen text, not fine score deltas. The overall score is a coarse mean; use mismatch_count falling as the real progress signal.
6. Log every step: (iter, axis_changed, old→new, overall_score, mismatch_count).

Worked example

iter1  overall=0.55  mism=6   worst: scene MISMATCH  ref:[dim bedroom] gen:[bright kitchen]
       edit scene → "dimly lit bedroom"
iter2  overall=0.63  mism=5   worst: body_orientation MISMATCH ref:[female on top, facing partner] gen:[female on bottom]
       edit → "woman straddling on top, facing him"
iter3  overall=0.71  mism=3   worst: lighting_color MISMATCH ref:[warm low-key] gen:[flat daylight]
       edit lighting → "warm low-key lighting"   (mism=4 → revert)
iter4  retry lighting → "warm golden low-key glow"   (mism=2 → keep, overall=0.82)
iter5  overall=0.88  mism=1   worst: hair PARTIAL ref:[curly shoulder-length] gen:[straight long]
       edit hair → "curly shoulder-length brown hair"
iter6  overall=0.93  mism=0   ≥ target → STOP

Report shape the agent reads (latest.json / stdout)

{
  "run_tag": "iter002",
  "overall_score": 0.63,
  "mismatch_count": 5,
  "axes": {
    "body_orientation": {"verdict": "mismatch", "ref": "female on top, facing partner", "gen": "female on bottom"},
    "scene":         {"verdict": "match",    "ref": "dim bedroom", "gen": "dim bedroom"}
  },
  "_prompt_id": "...", "_report_path": "..."
}

Agent system prompt (paste into your CLI agent)

You are the controller for a local image prompt calibrator. Goal: make a generated image match a reference, measured by a Qwen3-VL judge that compares ~23 axes (identity, body, wardrobe, action/pose, affect, camera, render) and for each returns a verdict (match / partial / mismatch), ref (what the reference shows) and gen (what the generated shows). overall_score and mismatch_count are computed from the verdicts.

You hold an axis state (current value per axis). Each turn: (1) render it to a prompt string; (2) run python agent_bridge.py --workflow <wf> --prompt "<rendered>" --negative "<neg>" --seed <seed> --run-tag iter<N> --analysis-dir <report_dir>; (3) read the printed JSON.

Then greedy per-axis hill-climb: keep the change only if overall_score improved, else revert to the best state; pick a mismatch axis (else a partial axis) and rewrite that axis's prompt wording to match its ref value (you decide the wording — there are no machine-supplied fixes). Change ONE axis per turn. Keep the seed fixed while searching. Stop when mismatch_count == 0 and overall_score ≥ TARGET (default 0.9), or after PATIENCE=4 non-improving turns, or MAX_ITERS=25. Log every step; report best prompt + score.