5j7[ JSrSSKrSSKrSSKJr \R "S5rSrSrSr S\ S \ 4S jr S \ 4S jr \R "S 5r S\ 4Sjr\R "S\R5rS\ 4SjrSSjrSrSrS \4SjrS\S\S \4SjrSS\S\S\S\4Sjjrg) a CompMatch: BidBrain's own comp based suggested bid engine (named 2026-08-25, Mark: "give the ai suggested bid a name so i can come back to improve later"). Learned from BidBrain's own real history (Mark 2026-08-24: "the original vision for BB was to use ai to understand from our own data our best sellers... to make educated bids", then, once the Didn't win data existed, "lets try and build a AI suggested bid to add to the slider that should win the car based on both won and lost (but sold for) data"). Refined 2026-08-25, same conversation: "compare year, transmission, engine size, mileage so that the ai is comparing as similar cars as it can". Deliberately simple and explainable rather than a real trained model: a suggestion is the 70th percentile of real winning prices among the closest real comps for that make and model, ranked by how similar their own mileage, year, transmission and engine size are to the car being priced, using only whichever of those a comp and the target car both happen to have (never a guess, never a penalty for a historical gap). A won purchase's own winning_bid is exactly as real a data point as a lost auction's own sold_for, both are the true price that won that specific car; db.bid_comps_full() already combines them with whatever else is known about each one. Never a gate, never touches pricing.py's own formula. A suggestion is shown only when there is real comparable history (min_samples), otherwise none, the same "hold back rather than guess" spirit as the rest of this project. N)datez(\d\.\d)gq= ףp>@g?namereturncU=(d SR5R5nU(dgUSUSSp2US:XaSnUS:XaU(aUSS:XaUSSnU(dU$US:Xa*U(a#USS :XaUSSnU(aUSS :XaUSSnU(dU$USnUS :Xa0[R"S U5nU(aUR S5nObUS:XaN[R"S U5=(d [R"SU5nU(aUR S5nOUS:XaUS:XaSnUSU3$)aA coarse "Make Model" grouping key from a free text vehicle name (for example "Mercedes A 180 D AMG Line Premium Auto" and "Mercedes A 180 D Sport Premium Auto" both key to "MERCEDES A"), the first two words, upper cased. Checked live against the real combined history 2026-08-24: 55 of 113 real distinct keys already carry 5 or more real comps, 31 carry 10 or more, without needing anything finer. A one word name (should not happen in practice, defensive only) keys on itself. Canonicalised 2026-08-25, the same real problem render.py's own _model_family/_canon_make_map already solved for the cockpit's Make and Model filters, found live to be splitting real comp groups so badly that whole models never got a suggestion at all: BMW comp names carry the engine badge as the model word ("118D", "320D"), so every BMW comp keyed to its own tiny badge group while a live "BMW 1 Series" car keyed to "BMW 1" and found ZERO of the 27 real 1 Series comps on file; Mercedes was split three ways ("MERCEDES A" 34, "MERCEDES A180" 7, "MERCEDES-BENZ A-CLASS" 8, one real model, 51 comps once merged); a live "MG Motor UK ZS" keyed to "MG MOTOR" and missed the real "MG ZS" group; and a handful of comps carry Motorway's own truncated "Insig" for Insignia. Same regex shapes as render._model_family (deliberately duplicated, not imported, this module stays pure and render depends the other way), applied to the one combined name string both comps and live cars key through, so both sides always land on the same canonical group.rNz MERCEDES-BENZMERCEDESBENZMGMOTORUKBMWz^(\d)\d{2}[A-Z]{0,2}$z^([A-Z]{1,3})-?CLASS$z^([A-Z]{1,3})\d{3}$VAUXHALLINSIGINSIGNIA )uppersplitrematchgroup)rpartsmakerestmodelms 5/Users/stevendouglas/BidBrain/bidbrain/bid_suggest.py model_keyrFsC2ZR   & & (E q59$  zdtAw&'8 ABxK t|aG!3ABx DGtO8D  GE u} HH-u 5 GGAJE   HH-u 5 `BXZ_9` GGAJE   0V1UG textc[RU=(d S5nU(a[URS55$S$)zThe engine size in litres parsed out of a free text engine string ("2.0 TDI", "1.6 Diesel Automatic"), or None when no plain X.X figure is found. Never guessed from anything else (a badge like "320d" is not parsed as 3.2).rr N)_ENGINE_LITRES_REsearchfloatr)r!rs r engine_litresr&s2   ,A !5 +t+r z^[A-Z]{2}(\d{2})[A-Z]{3}$regcU=(d SR5RSS5n[RU5nU(dg[ UR S55nSUs=::a S::aSU-$ SUs=::aS::a O gSUS- -$g) aA real registration year straight off a current format UK plate's own age identifier (Mark 2026-08-25, "make sure the age and mileage are being considered", checked live: sightings only covers 5 of 1038 real comps, far too sparse, while 980 of 1038 real regs already match this format). Format is AA99AAA: the two digits are 01-50 for a plate issued March to August of 2000+that figure, or 51-99 for one issued September to February of 2000+(that figure minus 50). Whole year only, not the exact month, which is all the comparison model needs. None for any other plate shape (an older letter prefix or suffix style, a private plate, or an invalid 00 identifier), never guessed.rrNr 2i3c)rreplace _REG_AGE_RErintr)r'rds r year_from_regr0s 9"    % %c2 .C#A  AGGAJAA||ax Q}"} q2v r z<\b(Automatic|Auto|DSG|Tiptronic|S[\s-]?Tronic|PDK|CVT|S-A)\bcP[RU=(d S5(aS$S$)a"Automatic" when the platform's own free text vehicle name carries a real automatic/semi-automatic badge (Auto, DSG, Tiptronic, S Tronic, PDK, CVT, or Motorway's own "S-A" abbreviation for Semi-Automatic, checked live: 120 of 1038 real comp names carry one of these), the same "Automatic" or "Semi auto" or nothing pricing.py's own _gearbox_label already uses for a live car, collapsed to one bucket here since a comp's exact semi vs full automatic split is not needed for the similarity match, only automatic vs manual is. Never returns "Manual": these names never spell that out (0 of 1038 do), so an unlabelled car is left unknown rather than assumed manual, the same "never guess" rule as everywhere else in this module.r AutomaticN) _AUTO_NAME_REr$)rs rtransmission_from_namer4s#(..tzr::;DDr c[R"U=(d SSS5nU=(d [R"5U- R[ - $![a gf=f)aHow many months ago a comp's own sale happened, from its date_bid (lost bids) or bought_date (purchases), both plain YYYY-MM-DD strings. None when the date is missing or unreadable, never guessed. today is overridable for tests only, the same convention as pricing.assess.rN )r fromisoformat ValueErrortodaydays_DAYS_PER_MONTH) date_textr9r/s rcomp_age_monthsr=sY     R"5 6 "djjla ' - - ?? s"A A#"A#c[U=(d S5R5R5nU(dgSU;aS$S$)apManual vs automatic, the two buckets the hard transmission gate actually compares on. Semi-automatic buckets WITH automatic: it is an automatic from a buyer's (and a value) point of view, and pricing.py's own class rules already treat "Automatic or Semi automatic" as one family (the no automatic Fords rule). Manual stays pure, nothing else ever buckets into it, so Mark's own "never mix manual and auto" hard gate is fully respected, this only stops the 13 real Semi-automatic comps (and every live Semi-automatic car, 24 on the 2026-08-25 list) being stranded in a third bucket too small to ever match anything. Checked live: the only real values anywhere in the data are Manual, Automatic, Semi-automatic and None, but matched on the word rather than exact equality so a future "6 speed manual" style string could never silently bucket as automatic. None (unknown) stays None.rNmanual automatic)strstriplower)ts r _tx_bucketrEs: AG ""$A 1}85+5r cU(dg[U5S:XaUS$[U5S- US- -n[U5[[U5S-[U5S- 5pCX#- nXXX- U--$)a Linear interpolated percentile of an already sorted list, pct 0-100. Plain and deterministic rather than statistics.quantiles, which changes its own boundary behaviour across small sample sizes in a way that is harder to reason about for a business figure like this.Nr rgY@)lenr.min) sorted_valuespctklohifracs r _percentilerOs  =QQ ] a C%K0A VSQ!S%7!%;< 6D   1M4E EM MMr c0nUHZnURS5bURS5(dM-UR[US5/5RU5 M\ U$)zGroups db.bid_comps_full()'s own rows (name, amount, retail, mileage, year, transmission, engine, any but name and amount may be None) by model_key. Returns {model_key: [comp dict, ...]}.amountr)get setdefaultrappend) comps_fullpoolcs r build_poolrXsY D  55? "!%%--   !F),b188; Kr targetcompc SnURS5(a=URS5(a'U[SS[USUS- 5S- - 5- nURS5(a=URS5(a'U[SS[USUS- 5S- - 5- nURS5(aqURS5(a[[US5R 5R 5[US5R 5R 5:XaUS- n[ URS 55[ URS 55pCU(a'U(a U[SS[X4- 5S - - 5- nURS 5(a=URS 5(a'U[SS[US US - 5S -- 5- nU$) aA similarity score between the car being priced and one real comp, both plain dicts with mileage/year/transmission/engine/grade. Only ever scores a factor when BOTH sides have it, so a gap in the historical record never counts against (or for) a comp, it just carries less weight. Mileage is weighted heaviest, it is the single biggest real driver of what a specific car is worth within a model; transmission is a binary match (Mark 2026-08-25: "if its manual or auto as auto will be worth more"); engine size, year and condition grade all taper off gently rather than a hard cutoff, since a comp a year, half a litre or one grade off is still a useful data point, just a slightly less exact one.mileageg@gL@yearg?g@ transmissionengineg333333?grade?)rRmaxabsrArBrCr&)rYrZscoret_litc_lits r _similarityrhs E zz))!4!4 S#F9$5Y$G H7 RRSS zz&dhhv.. S#F6NT&\$A BS HHII zz.!!dhh~&>&> vn% & , , . 4 4 6#d>>R:S:Y:Y:[:a:a:c c SLE H!56 dhhxFX8Y5  S#EM 2S 8899 zz'txx00 S#F7Od7m$C Ds JJKK Lr rV min_samplestop_nmin_ratio_samplesc ^^[[USS5=(d SS[USS5=(d S35nURU/5n[USS5[USS5[USS5[US S5[US S5S .n S n U RS5(aB[U S5n UV s/sH%n [U RS55U :XdM#U PM' nn S n UV s0sH(n [ U 5[ U RS5U5_M* sn mUV s/sH.n T[ U 5cMT[ U 5[ ::dM,U PM0 nn [U5U:agU4SjmUV s/sHn [X5U 4PM n n [SU 55nX:a8U RU4SjS9 U S[X25VV s/sHupU PM nnn S nOUnU nUSSV s/sHvn U RS5U RS5U RS5U RS5U RS5U RS5U RS5S.PMx nn [SU55nU(a_[U5U:aP[U[US5-5n[U5[R "U5U-[#UU5US UU:U US.$[SU55n[[US55n[U5[R "U5U(a [#UU5OUUS [%U5=(a UU:U US.$s sn fs sn fs sn fs sn fs sn nfs sn f)aThe suggested bid for this exact car (needs make, model, and ideally mileage/year/transmission/engine/grade, any of which may be blank), ranked against real comps for its make and model by how closely each one's own mileage, year, transmission, engine size and condition grade matches, not just "same model" (Mark 2026-08-25: "as similar as it can"). Narrows to the closest top_n comps only once there is real similarity signal to rank on (at least min_samples comps that share at least one comparable field with this car), otherwise falls back to every real comp for the model, the same plain "what did this model actually go for" figure the original build used, so an early, still sparsely enriched history never gets narrowed down to fewer than the reliable floor. Within that same closest cohort, when car_retail (this car's own real Cazana retail value) is known AND at least min_ratio_samples of the cohort also carry a real retail figure of their own, the suggestion is computed as a % of retail rather than a flat price (Mark 2026-08-25: "if we also knew that a 3 series winning bid was 90% of cazana retail... having this info should improve the accuracy"): the 70th percentile of each comp's own winning-price-over-its-own-retail ratio, applied to THIS car's own retail value, so two comps of very different spec (and so very different retail) are compared on how competitively each one actually sold relative to its own worth, rather than treated as equally comparable raw prices. Falls back to the plain raw-price percentile whenever this car's own retail is not yet known (no Cazana match) or too few comps in the cohort carry one. Whatever the source, the final figure is never allowed to exceed this car's own retail value when it is known (Mark 2026-08-25, a real car found live: "the ai bids are way off atm... manual is worth less than automatic, more mileage = low value, new the car means its worth more". Investigated: for the model in question 14 of 25 real comps showed a winning price ABOVE their own retail, most likely stale or mismatched historical Cazana lookups rather than dealers genuinely overpaying at that scale, but regardless of the cause, a suggestion to pay more than a car is actually worth can never be sound buying advice, so it is capped, the same "play safe" discipline as the rest of this project). The same implausible-ratio comps (over MAX_PLAUSIBLE_RATIO) are also excluded from every % of retail calculation in the first place, not just clamped at the end: checked live, they badly distort a same-model comparison, before excluding them 3 of 4 real models with enough automatic-vs-other data showed automatics selling for LESS of their own retail than everything else, backwards from reality; after excluding them, 3 of 4 correctly showed automatics selling for more, matching Mark's own "auto will be worth more". Manual and automatic are NEVER mixed together, a hard gate, not a soft preference (Mark 2026-08-25, first "really considering what % of cazana retail each make model and transmission each car achieves", then, once the first version of this still sometimes fell back to a mixed pool when there was not quite enough of one transmission: "the suggested bid must hard gate respect the difference between manual and auto, it would be better to have less data than inc auto and manual together"). Whenever this car's own transmission is known (virtually always true for a live car read straight off a platform), candidates are narrowed to ONLY comps that ALSO have a known, matching transmission, before anything else runs, with NO fallback to a mixed pool, ever, even if that leaves too little data to suggest anything at all, in which case this returns None rather than guess from a diluted comparison. Only when this car's own transmission is genuinely unknown (should be rare) does the gate not apply, there is nothing to respect the difference against. Deliberately never a CROSS-model adjustment either (tried, checked live, rejected: it mixed in whichever models happen to get badged "Auto" in their own listing name, a real confound, different models, not the same model on two gearboxes, and gave a backwards, wrong signal), always compared within one model at a time. The transmission match is on the manual vs automatic BUCKET (_tx_bucket), not the exact platform string: Semi-automatic is an automatic for value purposes and matches the automatic comps, manual stays pure either way, so the hard gate above is fully intact. A comp older than COMP_MAX_AGE_MONTHS, or with no readable sale date at all, never contributes a price figure, ratio or raw (see the constant's own comment for the measured month by month drift that forced this: today's Cazana retail against a years old sale price systematically inflates an old comp's own ratio, and an old raw amount is a price from a market and a car age that no longer exist). An undated comp is excluded rather than assumed recent, hold back rather than guess. Within the window, fresher comps also rank slightly ahead of equally specced older ones. Returns {"n", "median", "suggested", "like_for_like", "ratio_based", "capped", "transmission_matched"}, or None when there is not even min_samples worth of recent enough comps left for this model (and this car's own transmission, once the hard gate applies) at all, never a guess off a handful of cars.rrrrr]Nr^r_r`ra)r]r^r_r`raFTrcN>[SST[U5S[-- - 5$)Nr\rb)rcidCOMP_MAX_AGE_MONTHS)rWagess r_recency%suggest_bid_for_car.._recencys(3d2a5kQ1D-DEEFFr c3:# UHupUS:dM Sv M g7f)rr N).0s_s r &suggest_bid_for_car..s11q511s  c(>UST"US5-*$)Nrr ru)pairrrs r%suggest_bid_for_car..stAw$q'1B'B%Cr )keyrrQretail)rrQrr]r^r_rc3# UHQnURS5(dMURS5cM/USUS- [::dMDUSUS- v MS g7f)rrQN)rRMAX_PLAUSIBLE_RATIOrvrWs rryrzs[Ks!h.,-EE(O.8q{26II.AhK!H+-ssAAA AF)nmedian suggested like_for_like ratio_basedcappedtransmission_matchedcompsc3># UHn[US5v M g7f)rQN)r%rs rryrzs5AU1X;''s)rgetattrrRrEror=rprGrhsumsortrcsortedroundrO statisticsrrHbool)carrVrirj car_retailrkr9r candidatesrYrwantrWscoredranked_nrxuser comps_usedratiosramountsrrrqs @@rsuggest_bid_for_carrsjz wsFB/526aWb8Q8WUW7XY ZC#r"J3 40VT*^T:#x.gt, F! zz.!!&01!+YAz!%%:O/PTX/Xa Y#BL M*QBqE?155=%8 8* MD'UZ"Q%[15be@S1SZJU :$G3= >:a{6%q):F >111H C D#$=TQq=> , r7$#a55=AEE(OquuU]eeI.f #$55#8!%%-Q#$KsKKFc&k%66*{62'>>? V ''/*<Y 3**,$8  555Gk'2./I X##G,3=SJ/9&z"=y:'= 4  qZ NU??$s76"MM*/M M7MM1M!M&$A=M,)N)NN)__doc__rrdatetimercompiler#rpr;rrArr&r-r0Ir3r4r=rErOdictrXr%rhr.rrur rrs8 JJ{+*?C?C?D,,jj56 s. CRTTK  E E @6( N d DU8MOLPk4kckck=@kr