f8b21af4be
10_Wiki/Topics 대규모 정리: - 오류 캡처/미완성 stub 문서 227개 제거 - 교차폴더 중복 43클러스터 병합 (63파일 → redirect) - 링크명 정규화: 깨진 링크 수정·redirect 직결·개념 매핑 ~2,400건 - 카테고리 MOC 6개 신규 생성 - Graph 섹션 미해결 related-keyword 링크 10,058건 제거 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
258 lines
7.4 KiB
Markdown
258 lines
7.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: wiki-2026-0508-asset-specific-knowledge
|
|
title: Asset-Specific Knowledge
|
|
category: 10_Wiki/Topics
|
|
status: verified
|
|
canonical_id: self
|
|
aliases: [자산 특정적 지식, tacit knowledge, institutional knowledge, tribal knowledge, moat, RAG]
|
|
duplicate_of: none
|
|
source_trust_level: B
|
|
confidence_score: 0.85
|
|
verification_status: applied
|
|
tags: [knowledge-management, tacit-knowledge, moat, rag, institutional, onboarding, fine-tuning]
|
|
raw_sources: []
|
|
last_reinforced: 2026-05-10
|
|
github_commit: pending
|
|
tech_stack:
|
|
language: knowledge management
|
|
applicable_to: [Custom RAG, Fine-tuning, Onboarding, Documentation]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Asset-Specific Knowledge
|
|
|
|
## 📌 한 줄 통찰
|
|
> **"매 다른 곳 X 의 나만의 무기"**. 매 codebase / business / domain 의 deep context. 매 tacit (문서 X) + 매 high replacement cost. 매 modern AI 시대 의 가장 큰 differentiator — 매 generic LLM 의 X 가, 매 RAG / fine-tune 의 internalize.
|
|
|
|
## 📖 핵심
|
|
|
|
### 매 정의 (Williamson 1985)
|
|
- 매 specific asset 에 의 가치 의 lock-in.
|
|
- 매 site / physical / human / dedicated.
|
|
- 매 transfer cost 의 high.
|
|
|
|
### 매 type
|
|
1. **Tacit (암묵지)**: 매 doc X — 매 experience.
|
|
2. **Codebase**: 매 specific architecture / convention.
|
|
3. **Business domain**: 매 customer pattern / regulation.
|
|
4. **Process**: 매 workflow / decision rule.
|
|
5. **Relationship**: 매 customer / vendor.
|
|
6. **Historical**: 매 past incident / decision.
|
|
|
|
### 매 examples
|
|
- **War story**: "매 last year 의 deploy 의 X 의 fail 의 이유는..."
|
|
- **Convention**: "매 우리 team 의 매 React 의 hook 의 이런 식으로..."
|
|
- **Customer quirk**: "매 client A 의 매 Friday 의 deploy 의 X."
|
|
- **Performance**: "매 query X 의 매 prod 의 매 slow."
|
|
- **Regulation**: "매 our market 의 매 GDPR 의 매 X 적용."
|
|
|
|
### 매 Williamson 의 economics
|
|
- 매 transaction cost.
|
|
- 매 hold-up problem.
|
|
- 매 vertical integration.
|
|
- 매 firm boundary.
|
|
|
|
→ 매 economic moat 의 source.
|
|
|
|
### 매 challenges
|
|
1. **Bus factor**: 매 1 person → leave → 매 collapse.
|
|
2. **Onboarding**: 매 6 month + 매 mentorship.
|
|
3. **Documentation**: 매 stale.
|
|
4. **Knowledge transfer**: 매 hard.
|
|
5. **Tribal cliques**: 매 inclusion 의 X.
|
|
|
|
### 매 modern AI 적용
|
|
|
|
#### Custom RAG
|
|
- 매 internal docs + 매 LLM.
|
|
- 매 retrieval 의 specificity.
|
|
- 매 GPT 의 generic 의 enhance.
|
|
|
|
#### Fine-tuning
|
|
- 매 organization-specific data.
|
|
- 매 LoRA / QLoRA.
|
|
- 매 cost-effective.
|
|
|
|
#### Internal LLM
|
|
- 매 self-hosted.
|
|
- 매 data privacy.
|
|
- 매 brand voice.
|
|
|
|
#### Agent specialization
|
|
- 매 internal tool API.
|
|
- 매 codebase-specific guideline.
|
|
- 매 history-aware.
|
|
|
|
### 매 capture method
|
|
1. **Pair programming / shadowing**.
|
|
2. **Recorded sessions** (Loom, Tella).
|
|
3. **ADR / RFC**.
|
|
4. **Postmortem**.
|
|
5. **War story doc**.
|
|
6. **AMA / office hours**.
|
|
7. **LLM-mediated extraction** (interview → structured).
|
|
8. **Code comments** (선별적).
|
|
|
|
## 💻 패턴
|
|
|
|
### Internal RAG
|
|
```python
|
|
from langchain.vectorstores import Chroma
|
|
from langchain.embeddings import OpenAIEmbeddings
|
|
from langchain.text_splitter import RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter
|
|
|
|
# 매 internal sources
|
|
sources = [
|
|
'wiki/*.md',
|
|
'adr/*.md',
|
|
'postmortem/*.md',
|
|
'codebase/README.md',
|
|
'slack/threads.json', # 매 sanitized
|
|
]
|
|
|
|
splitter = RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter(chunk_size=1000, chunk_overlap=200)
|
|
docs = []
|
|
for source in sources:
|
|
for doc in load(source):
|
|
docs.extend(splitter.split_documents([doc]))
|
|
|
|
vectorstore = Chroma.from_documents(
|
|
docs,
|
|
embedding=OpenAIEmbeddings(),
|
|
persist_directory='./internal_kb',
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
def ask_internal(question):
|
|
relevant = vectorstore.similarity_search(question, k=5)
|
|
context = '\n\n'.join(d.page_content for d in relevant)
|
|
return llm.generate(f"""Use this internal knowledge:
|
|
{context}
|
|
|
|
Question: {question}
|
|
Answer with citations to the source docs.""")
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Bus-factor mitigation
|
|
```python
|
|
def bus_factor_audit(repo):
|
|
blame_data = get_git_blame_stats(repo)
|
|
|
|
high_risk = []
|
|
for file_path, contributors in blame_data.items():
|
|
if not contributors: continue
|
|
top_share = contributors[0].lines / sum(c.lines for c in contributors)
|
|
if top_share > 0.8 and len(contributors) <= 2:
|
|
high_risk.append({
|
|
'file': file_path,
|
|
'owner': contributors[0].name,
|
|
'share': top_share,
|
|
})
|
|
return sorted(high_risk, key=lambda x: -x['share'])
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
→ 매 high bus-factor file 의 pair programming target.
|
|
|
|
### War story extraction (LLM-mediated)
|
|
```python
|
|
def extract_war_story(slack_thread):
|
|
prompt = f"""Extract a structured "war story" from this Slack incident thread.
|
|
|
|
Format:
|
|
- Trigger: what initially failed
|
|
- Diagnosis: how it was identified
|
|
- Fix: what resolved it
|
|
- Lesson: non-obvious learning
|
|
- Tags: [domain, tech]
|
|
|
|
Thread:
|
|
{slack_thread}"""
|
|
return structured_llm.generate(prompt)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### LoRA fine-tune (organization)
|
|
```python
|
|
from peft import LoraConfig, get_peft_model
|
|
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
|
|
from trl import SFTTrainer
|
|
|
|
base = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained('meta-llama/Llama-3-8B')
|
|
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained('meta-llama/Llama-3-8B')
|
|
|
|
lora = LoraConfig(r=16, lora_alpha=32, target_modules=['q_proj', 'v_proj'], lora_dropout=0.05)
|
|
model = get_peft_model(base, lora)
|
|
|
|
# 매 org-specific Q&A pairs
|
|
trainer = SFTTrainer(model=model, train_dataset=org_dataset, tokenizer=tokenizer)
|
|
trainer.train()
|
|
|
|
# 매 tiny LoRA adapter (50MB) — 매 portable, 매 swappable.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Onboarding doc template
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# [Service Name] Onboarding
|
|
|
|
## 30-second pitch
|
|
[1 sentence]
|
|
|
|
## Why it exists
|
|
[origin story + alternative considered]
|
|
|
|
## Key concepts
|
|
- [domain term 1]: meaning + when to use
|
|
- [domain term 2]: ...
|
|
|
|
## Common pitfalls
|
|
- [war story 1]: don't do X because Y happened
|
|
- [war story 2]: ...
|
|
|
|
## Who to ask
|
|
- [Topic A]: @person
|
|
- [Topic B]: @team
|
|
|
|
## Reading list (priority)
|
|
1. [link] — 30min
|
|
2. [link] — 1h
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## 🤔 결정 기준
|
|
| 상황 | Strategy |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Generic question | Public LLM |
|
|
| Codebase-specific | Internal RAG |
|
|
| Domain expert simulation | Fine-tune |
|
|
| Privacy-critical | Self-hosted LLM |
|
|
| Bus-factor risk | Pair programming + record |
|
|
| Onboarding | RAG + structured doc |
|
|
| War story | LLM extract + curate |
|
|
|
|
**기본값**: Internal RAG 의 baseline. 매 high-volume specific = LoRA. 매 critical = self-host.
|
|
|
|
## 🔗 Graph
|
|
- 변형: [[Tacit-Knowledge]] · [[Tribal-Knowledge]]
|
|
- 응용: [[RAG]] · [[Fine-Tuning]] · [[LoRA]] · [[Onboarding]] · [[ADR]]
|
|
- Adjacent: [[Postmortem]] · [[Moat]]
|
|
|
|
## 🤖 LLM 활용
|
|
**언제**: 매 internal RAG 설계. 매 onboarding system. 매 war story 의 extract. 매 organization-specific tool.
|
|
**언제 X**: 매 generic / public knowledge. 매 single-person consumption.
|
|
|
|
## ❌ 안티패턴
|
|
- **No documentation**: 매 leave → 매 collapse.
|
|
- **All in one head**: 매 bus factor 1.
|
|
- **Generic LLM 의 internal task**: 매 hallucination.
|
|
- **RAG 의 stale**: 매 outdated.
|
|
- **Fine-tune 의 small data**: 매 overfit.
|
|
- **No audit / curation**: 매 outdated war story.
|
|
- **Tribal exclusion**: 매 newcomer 의 onboard X.
|
|
|
|
## 🧪 검증 / 중복
|
|
- Verified (Williamson 1985, Polanyi tacit knowledge).
|
|
- 신뢰도 B.
|
|
- Related: [[RAG]] · [[Fine-Tuning]] · [[Onboarding]] · [[ADR]] · [[Bus-Factor]].
|
|
|
|
## 🕓 Changelog
|
|
| 날짜 | 변경 |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| 2026-05-08 | Phase 1 |
|
|
| 2026-05-10 | Manual cleanup — type + capture method + 매 RAG / LoRA / bus factor code |
|