RFD 1166: How the accelerator candidates were scored
Problem
Eight RFDs cite a score out of 25 and no document says what the 25 measures, so a reader cannot reproduce it or tell which scores rest on measurement. It was also applied before it was written.
Decision
Eight dimensions, each scored 0 to 100:
fit headroom at a workable precision
shape is the graph fixed-shape
reference does a working precedent exist
clear is anything else blocking it
value what accelerating it buys
adapt can this desk train, tune or LoRA it
ask can we get an answer out of it
wanted does anyone want the thing it doesadapt and ask are duals. check_rfd1166_rank.py recomputes the STAR order with starvote.
ABANDONED 2026-08-29, and RFD 1171 replaces it. The ranking asked which candidate is most worth accelerating, and that was the wrong question: these are stages of one loop, not competitors for one device, and a stage does not outrank the stage it feeds. Qwen3-ASR entering at seat 2 made it plain.
DETAILS.md keeps the table and the measurements that RFD 1171 cites.