SAGE: Recursive Meta-Observation

How depth 1-10+ reasoning predicts cascading failures.

The Core Capability

SAGE performs recursive meta-observation at multiple depths.

Most monitoring observes infrastructure only at single level.

SAGE observes infrastructure AND the agents observing infrastructure.

Then SAGE reflects on its own past reflections.

Depth increases from one to ten-plus levels progressively.

Each level discovers patterns invisible at shallower depths.

This enables prediction before problems cascade across systems.

Recursive Depth Example

DEPTH 1 (Infrastructure Observation)

"Container ifp-grafana CPU: 78% (high but not critical)"

↓ SAGE Observes
DEPTH 2 (Observer Meta-Observation)

"DevOps Agent marked this as 'monitor' (no action).

Agent confidence for 'scale' action: 0.89 (medium).

Question: Why didn't agent suggest scaling?"

↓ SAGE Reflects
DEPTH 3 (Reflection on Observation)

"DevOps Agent learned: Grafana CPU spikes correlate

with dashboard refreshes (every 30s). Spikes are

transient, not sustained load. Scaling would waste

resources. Agent's non-action was CORRECT decision."

↓ SAGE Discovers Pattern
DEPTH 4 (Pattern Recognition)

"This pattern (transient spike + no action) appears

in 12 other services: Prometheus, TimescaleDB, Redis.

All have periodic query patterns. Agent has learned

to distinguish transient vs sustained load."

↓ SAGE Meta-Learning
DEPTH 5 (System Validation)

"DevOps Agent's learning system is working well.

Confidence weights accurately reflect service

behavior. No adjustment needed. This validates

the weight adaptation algorithm."

↓ SAGE Cross-Domain
DEPTH 6 (System-Wide Correlation)

"Transient spike pattern correlates with feature

extraction cycles (every 5 min). All database

services show synchronized spikes. This is

expected behavior, not infrastructure problem."

↓ SAGE Predicts
DEPTH 7 (Predictive Insight)

"Next feature extraction: 14:35:00 UTC (+2 min).

Expected CPU spike: 78% → 85% (transient).

Expected duration: 8-12 seconds.

Action required: None (within normal parameters)."

Why Recursive Depth Matters

Depth Range Insight Type Equivalent Expertise
1-2 Reactive (problem detection) What monitoring tools do
3-4 Analytical (root cause) What good engineers do
5-7 Predictive (pattern recognition) What senior engineers do
8-10 Optimizing (system-wide strategy) What architects do
10+ Meta-learning (framework refinement) What IFP does uniquely

Current Limitations (And DGX Solution)

Current: Depth 1-3 (Claude API)

Cost per cycle: $0.012 (Claude API)

Daily cost: $0.012 × 1,440 cycles = $17.28/day

Monthly cost: $518.40/month

Limitation: Depth 3 is maximum economically viable.

With DGX Spark: Depth 1-100 (Local)

Cost per cycle: $0.002 (local Llama 3.3 70B)

Daily cost: $0.002 × 1,440 cycles = $2.88/day

Monthly cost: $86.40/month

Savings: $432/month (83% reduction)

Benefit: Depth 10-100 becomes economically viable.

Result: Deeper reasoning → Better predictions → Fewer incidents.

Production Verification

📊 Live SAGE Dashboard

Real-time depth tracking and cycle metrics.

View Dashboard →

📝 Context File

View recursive reasoning chains in insights.jsonl

~/ifp-workspace/insights.jsonl

⚙️ Current Depth

Depth: 3 levels (pre-DGX)

Target: 10-100 levels (post-DGX)

💰 Cost Analysis

See full ROI breakdown with DGX integration

View Savings →