Better merge

pipeline/transform/merge.py

@@ -1220,20 +1220,6 @@ def _ratio_bonus(
     return cap * (1.0 - rel / pct)
 
 
-def _rooms_bonus(left: int | None, right: int | None) -> float:
-    if left is None or right is None:
-        return 0.0
-    try:
-        diff = abs(int(left) - int(right))
-    except (TypeError, ValueError):
-        return 0.0
-    if diff == 0:
-        return 4.0
-    if diff == 1:
-        return 2.0
-    return 0.0
-
-
 def _street_only_address(address: str) -> str:
     """The street/locality part of a normalised address: digit-bearing tokens
     (house numbers, flat numbers, including letter suffixes like 8A) removed."""
@@ -1350,6 +1336,47 @@ def _best_listing_match(
 # should beat a bare attribute-agreement win.
 _STREET_FALLBACK_SAME_POSTCODE_BONUS = 3.0
 _STREET_FALLBACK_NUMBER_OVERLAP_BONUS = 8.0
+# A street-representative construction year is only meaningful when the street
+# is era-homogeneous (a single development). When the same-street certificates
+# span more than this many years between their oldest and newest build, the
+# street mixes construction eras (a Victorian terrace with modern infill, say),
+# so no single year represents the unidentified number-less listing property —
+# the fallback then publishes a null construction year rather than an arbitrary,
+# often wrong-by-a-century guess. Two adjacent EPC age bands (one development
+# straddling a band boundary) span at most ~26 representative years, so this
+# threshold keeps genuinely-uniform streets while rejecting mixed ones.
+_STREET_FALLBACK_CONSTRUCTION_SPAN_YEARS = 30
+
+
+def _street_match_with_reliable_construction_year(
+    match: dict, street_candidates: list[dict]
+) -> dict:
+    """Drop the construction year from a street-fallback match on a mixed street.
+
+    The street fallback identifies a *street*, not the specific (number-less)
+    listing property, so its construction year is only trustworthy when the
+    street is era-homogeneous. When the same-street certificates span more than
+    ``_STREET_FALLBACK_CONSTRUCTION_SPAN_YEARS`` between their oldest and newest
+    build, the street mixes construction eras and the matched certificate's year
+    (e.g. an 1890 Victorian house on a street with 2007 infill) would otherwise
+    be presented as the listing property's own — so the year and its
+    approximate-date flag are nulled, leaving an honest "unknown" rather than a
+    wrong-by-a-century value. Other street-representative EPC facts (energy
+    rating, floor area) are inherently per-property approximations the fallback
+    already accepts and are left untouched.
+    """
+    years = [
+        year
+        for candidate in street_candidates
+        if (year := candidate.get("_direct_construction_age_band")) is not None
+    ]
+    if years and max(years) - min(years) > _STREET_FALLBACK_CONSTRUCTION_SPAN_YEARS:
+        return {
+            **match,
+            "_direct_construction_age_band": None,
+            "_direct_is_construction_date_approximate": None,
+        }
+    return match
 
 
 def _best_street_epc_fallback(
@@ -1371,15 +1398,19 @@ def _best_street_epc_fallback(
     matchable listings (funnel-measured on 2026-06 data). Street identity is
     token_set_ratio between the digit-stripped halves of both addresses (every
     same-street certificate scores ~100); qualifying certificates are ranked
-    by attribute agreement (property type, floor area, habitable rooms) plus
-    a same-postcode-unit preference and a house-number-overlap bonus (a
+    by attribute agreement (property type and floor area) plus a
+    same-postcode-unit preference and a house-number-overlap bonus (a
     numbered listing that failed the strict set-equality gate, e.g. a
     "751 753" range vs "751", still lands on the right property). The result
     is street-representative rather than property-exact — hence the distinct
     "street" method label so downstream consumers can tell the two confidence
-    levels apart. Applied to the direct-EPC join only; the property-register
-    (sale history) join stays strict because a price is property-exact in a
-    way an energy band is not.
+    levels apart. The matched certificate's construction year is kept only when
+    the street is era-homogeneous (see
+    ``_street_match_with_reliable_construction_year``); on an era-mixed street it
+    is nulled, since a single year cannot represent the unidentified property.
+    Applied to the direct-EPC join only; the property-register (sale history)
+    join stays strict because a price is property-exact in a way an energy band
+    is not.
 
     ``street_score_cache`` memoises the per-(outcode, query-street) fuzzy scan
     over the outcode's unique street keys: listings on the same street share
@@ -1416,6 +1447,7 @@ def _best_street_epc_fallback(
     listing_postcode = listing.get("_listing_match_postcode")
     listing_numbers = set(_SUFFIXED_NUMBER_RE.findall(query))
     best: dict | None = None
+    best_street: str | None = None
     best_total = float("-inf")
     best_street_score = 0
     for street_score, street in qualifying:
@@ -1433,10 +1465,13 @@ def _best_street_epc_fallback(
                 pct=0.12,
                 cap=8.0,
             )
-            total += _rooms_bonus(
-                listing.get("_actual_number_habitable_rooms"),
-                candidate.get("_direct_number_habitable_rooms"),
-            )
+            # No habitable-room agreement bonus: the listing's only room count is
+            # "Number of bedrooms & living rooms", which is actually bedrooms +
+            # bathrooms (the upstream storage.py defect noted in
+            # `_finalize_listings`). It systematically over-counts, so comparing
+            # it to the EPC habitable-room count biases selection toward larger,
+            # typically older certificates — the opposite of a useful signal —
+            # and there is no clean listing-side habitable-room count to use.
             if (
                 listing_postcode
                 and candidate.get("_direct_epc_match_postcode") == listing_postcode
@@ -1451,10 +1486,16 @@ def _best_street_epc_fallback(
             if total > best_total:
                 best_total = total
                 best = candidate
+                best_street = street
                 best_street_score = street_score
 
     if best is None:
         return None
+    # A street-representative construction year is unreliable when the winning
+    # street mixes construction eras; null it rather than imputing one cert's.
+    best = _street_match_with_reliable_construction_year(
+        best, outcode_streets.get(best_street or "", [])
+    )
     return best, float(best_street_score), "street", None
 
 

pipeline/transform/test_merge.py

@@ -1129,6 +1129,70 @@ def test_match_direct_epc_street_fallback_recovers_numbered_listing() -> None:
     assert matches["_direct_epc_match_method"].to_list() == ["street"]
 
 
+def test_match_direct_epc_street_fallback_nulls_year_on_mixed_era_street() -> None:
+    # A number-less listing is matched to the *street*, never the exact property.
+    # When the same-street certificates span construction eras (a Victorian house
+    # and 2007 infill here), no single year represents the unidentified property,
+    # so the street-representative construction year is nulled rather than letting
+    # a new-build inherit an 1890 build date (the Enderby Street, Greenwich bug).
+    # Other EPC facts stay as street-representative estimates.
+    matches = _match_direct_epc(
+        _listing_matches([{"_listing_match_address": "EXAMPLE ROAD BROMLEY"}]),
+        _direct_epc_candidates(
+            [
+                {
+                    "_direct_epc_match_address": "8 EXAMPLE ROAD",
+                    "_direct_epc_address": "8, Example Road",
+                    "_direct_construction_age_band": 1890,
+                },
+                {
+                    "_direct_epc_row": 1,
+                    "_direct_epc_match_address": "15 EXAMPLE ROAD",
+                    "_direct_epc_address": "15, Example Road",
+                    "_direct_construction_age_band": 2007,
+                },
+            ]
+        ),
+    )
+
+    assert matches.height == 1
+    assert matches["_direct_epc_match_method"].to_list() == ["street"]
+    assert matches["_direct_construction_age_band"].to_list() == [None]
+    assert matches["_direct_is_construction_date_approximate"].to_list() == [None]
+    # Energy rating remains a street-representative estimate (only the year is
+    # categorically wrong on a mixed street; the rest stay best-effort).
+    assert matches["_direct_current_energy_rating"].to_list() == ["C"]
+
+
+def test_match_direct_epc_street_fallback_keeps_year_on_uniform_street() -> None:
+    # When the street is era-homogeneous (one development), the
+    # street-representative construction year IS meaningful and is kept. Two
+    # adjacent EPC bands a few years apart count as uniform.
+    matches = _match_direct_epc(
+        _listing_matches([{"_listing_match_address": "EXAMPLE ROAD BROMLEY"}]),
+        _direct_epc_candidates(
+            [
+                {
+                    "_direct_epc_match_address": "8 EXAMPLE ROAD",
+                    "_direct_epc_address": "8, Example Road",
+                    "_direct_construction_age_band": 2007,
+                },
+                {
+                    "_direct_epc_row": 1,
+                    "_direct_epc_match_address": "15 EXAMPLE ROAD",
+                    "_direct_epc_address": "15, Example Road",
+                    "_direct_construction_age_band": 2009,
+                },
+            ]
+        ),
+    )
+
+    assert matches.height == 1
+    assert matches["_direct_epc_match_method"].to_list() == ["street"]
+    assert matches["_direct_construction_age_band"].to_list() == [2007]
+    assert matches["_direct_is_construction_date_approximate"].to_list() == [1]
+
+
 def test_match_direct_epc_street_fallback_rejects_town_only_address() -> None:
     # A town-only listing address ("COULSDON SURREY") shares only the locality
     # suffix that most street keys in the outcode carry; without a street-name