Skip to content

TechStack.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
201 lines (157 loc) · 7.47 KB

TechStack.md

File metadata and controls

201 lines (157 loc) · 7.47 KB
Raw

Technology Stack Document

This document details the technologies, libraries, and tools used in the Knowledge Graph Synthesis System, providing rationale for each choice and highlighting key components.

1. Core Technologies

1.1 Programming Language

  • Python 3.9+
    • Rationale: Extensive library support for NLP, graph processing, and ML tasks
    • Benefits: Beginner-friendly syntax, strong type hinting support, widespread adoption
    • Limitations: Performance trade-offs compared to compiled languages

1.2 Development Environment

  • Poetry
    • Rationale: Modern dependency management and packaging
    • Benefits: Reproducible builds, virtual environment management
    • Alternative: pip + requirements.txt for simplicity if preferred

1.3 Version Control

  • Git
    • Rationale: Industry-standard version control
    • Benefits: History tracking, branching, collaboration support
    • Tooling: GitHub for hosting and collaboration

2. Key Libraries and Frameworks

2.1 Text Processing

  • NLTK

    • Purpose: Basic NLP tasks, tokenization, stemming
    • Benefits: Mature, well-documented, extensive language support
    • Limitations: Slower than some alternatives, not deep-learning based

  • spaCy

    • Purpose: Advanced NLP, entity recognition, dependency parsing
    • Benefits: Fast, accurate, Python-native design, multilingual support
    • Limitations: Model size can be large

  • langdetect

    • Purpose: Language detection for multilingual support
    • Benefits: Lightweight, reasonably accurate
    • Limitations: May struggle with short texts

2.2 Graph Processing

  • NetworkX

    • Purpose: Graph creation, manipulation, and analysis
    • Benefits: Pythonic, flexible, extensive algorithms, beginner-friendly
    • Limitations: Not optimized for very large graphs

  • PyVis

    • Purpose: Interactive graph visualization
    • Benefits: Easy integration with NetworkX, interactive features
    • Limitations: Limited customization compared to D3.js

  • Community Detection

    • Purpose: Finding communities and clusters in graphs
    • Options: python-louvain (Louvain method), infomap

2.3 LLM Integration

  • LangChain

    • Purpose: Framework for LLM applications
    • Benefits: Standardized interfaces, chain of thought, integration with various providers
    • Limitations: Evolving API, sometimes more complex than needed

  • API Clients

    • Anthropic API: For Claude models
    • OpenAI API: For GPT models
    • Google API: For Gemini models
    • DeepSeek API: For DeepSeek models
    • Ollama SDK: For local models

2.4 Data Storage

  • SQLite

    • Purpose: Lightweight database for persistence
    • Benefits: Zero configuration, file-based, beginner-friendly
    • Limitations: Limited concurrency, not suitable for distributed systems

  • JSON files

    • Purpose: Storage of graph data and results
    • Benefits: Human-readable, widely supported, simple
    • Limitations: Not optimized for large datasets

2.5 Web Interface (Optional)

  • Streamlit
    • Purpose: Simple web interface for interaction
    • Benefits: Python-native, fast development, minimal frontend knowledge required
    • Limitations: Less customization than full web frameworks

3. Infrastructure and Deployment

3.1 Local Development

  • Virtual Environments

    • Purpose: Isolation of dependencies
    • Options: Poetry environments, venv, conda

  • Environment Variables

    • Purpose: Configuration and secrets management
    • Implementation: python-dotenv for loading from .env files

3.2 Testing

  • pytest

    • Purpose: Unit and integration testing
    • Benefits: Simple fixture system, parametrization, good ecosystem

  • pytest-mock

    • Purpose: Mocking external dependencies
    • Benefits: Simplifies testing of components that use LLM APIs

3.3 Code Quality

  • black

    • Purpose: Code formatting
    • Benefits: Consistent style, reduces formatting debates

  • flake8

    • Purpose: Style guide enforcement
    • Benefits: Catches common errors, maintains code quality

  • mypy

    • Purpose: Static type checking
    • Benefits: Catches type errors early, improves code documentation

4. External Services

4.1 LLM Providers

  • Anthropic API (Claude)

    • Purpose: High-quality text generation and reasoning
    • Benefits: Strong reasoning capabilities, longer context windows
    • Limitations: Cost, API rate limits

  • OpenAI API (GPT)

    • Purpose: Alternative text generation and reasoning
    • Benefits: Widely used, extensive documentation
    • Limitations: Cost, API rate limits

  • Google API (Gemini)

    • Purpose: Alternative text generation and reasoning
    • Benefits: Competitive capabilities, potential integration with other Google services
    • Limitations: Cost, API rate limits

  • DeepSeek API

    • Purpose: Alternative text generation and reasoning
    • Benefits: Specialized models for certain domains
    • Limitations: Emerging platform, less documentation

  • Ollama (Local)

    • Purpose: Local model execution
    • Benefits: No API costs, privacy, no internet required
    • Limitations: Limited by local hardware, potentially lower quality

5. Architecture Patterns

5.1 Module Organization

  • Hexagonal Architecture
    • Purpose: Separate core logic from external services
    • Benefits: Swappable components, testability, clean separation of concerns

5.2 Dependency Injection

  • Function-based DI
    • Purpose: Provide dependencies to components without tight coupling
    • Benefits: Testability, flexibility, simplicity
    • Implementation: Simple factory functions rather than complex frameworks

5.3 Domain-Driven Design

  • Bounded Contexts
    • Purpose: Organize the system into logical domains
    • Benefits: Clearer organization, focused responsibility
    • Implementation: Lightweight, focusing on vocabulary and structure

6. API Design

6.1 LLM Provider API

  • Facade Pattern
    • Purpose: Unified interface for different LLM providers
    • Benefits: Easy switching between providers, consistent error handling

6.2 Module Interfaces

  • Function-based Interfaces
    • Purpose: Clearly defined entry points for modules
    • Benefits: Simplicity, maintainability, beginner-friendly

6.3 Error Handling

  • Result Pattern
    • Purpose: Consistent error handling across modules
    • Benefits: Predictable error propagation, clear success/failure indicators
    • Implementation: Simple result objects with success flag and error details

7. Technology Rationale

The technology choices prioritize:

  1. Beginner-Friendliness: Using well-documented, widely-adopted libraries with gentle learning curves
  2. Flexibility: Supporting multiple LLM providers and languages
  3. Maintainability: Clear structure and separation of concerns
  4. Pragmatism: Favoring simple, straightforward solutions over complex architectures

Alternative stacks were considered, including:

  • Neo4j for graph storage: More powerful but introduces additional complexity
  • FastAPI for web interface: More flexible but requires more frontend knowledge
  • Rust or Go for core components: Better performance but steeper learning curve and less beginner-friendly
  • Hugging Face models: Greater flexibility but more complex setup and higher local resource requirements

The chosen stack balances accessibility, flexibility, and power, making it well-suited for the project requirements while remaining approachable for developers with varying experience levels.