Decision 01 · MLOps · Notebook Automation
Automated Daily Reporting Engine
In plain termsThis is the automated report factory — it runs the full analysis pipeline across all media categories on a schedule, producing consistent, reproducible reports without any manual intervention from analysts.
The problem
Converting notebooks to scripts for production loses the cell-by-cell state that makes failures debuggable.
The common approach — nbconvert to script, then execute — discards intermediate cell outputs. When an analysis fails at cell 18 of 40, there's nothing to inspect. Papermill keeps the output notebook as an execution record with all intermediate state preserved.
jupyter nbconvert --execute discards cell outputs. Sequential loops block on failures.
✗ Failed analysis produces no intermediate state. One failing notebook blocks the rest in a sequential loop.
Papermill injects parameters at the tagged cell and writes a full output notebook. multiprocessing.Pool runs independent categories in parallel.
✓ Output notebooks capture all intermediate state. Parallel execution means one failure doesn't block others.
- 01Build params dict (date, category, paths)Injected at tagged cell — template notebook unchanged
- 02pm.execute_notebook() → timestamped outputOutput notebook preserves all intermediate cell states
- 03Dispatch all categories via Pool.starmap()Each notebook process is independent — failures are isolated
- 04Archive output notebooks as audit recordsEvery run is reproducible and inspectable at the cell level
✓ Cell-by-cell failure state preserved · parallel-safe · reproducible
Code walkthrough — 3 steps · scroll or click
"""
Parameterised notebook pipeline runner using Papermill.
WHAT IT DEMONSTRATES:
How to orchestrate daily automated analysis by treating Jupyter notebooks
as parameterised, reproducible execution units. Each analysis category
runs the same template notebook with a different parameter set.
WHY IT'S INTERESTING:
Papermill bridges the gap between exploratory Jupyter analysis and
production pipelines. The template approach means data scientists can
iterate on notebooks locally, and the same file runs in production
with injected parameters — no code duplication, full reproducibility,
and output notebooks serve as execution audit logs.
NOVELTY:
The common alternative — converting notebooks to Python scripts for
production — loses the cell-by-cell execution state that makes debugging
failures tractable. Papermill's output notebooks preserve intermediate
cell outputs, making it straightforward to identify which analysis step
failed and why, without adding explicit checkpointing code. The dual
execution mode (sequential for debugging, multiprocessing.Pool for daily
production runs) is surfaced via a single parameter rather than two code
paths, preventing the classic problem where the "fast path" and "debug path"
diverge over time. Category isolation means one failing analysis doesn't
block the others — each notebook process is fully independent.
"""
from __future__ import annotations
import os
import multiprocessing
from datetime import datetime
from pathlib import Path
from time import sleep
from typing import Any
import papermill as pm
# ── Single-notebook execution ──────────────────────────────────────────────
def run_notebook(
template: str,
params: dict[str, Any],
output_filename: str,
template_dir: str,
output_dir: str,
run_id: str,
runner_id: str,
analysis_category: str,
) -> str:
"""
Execute a parameterised Jupyter notebook via Papermill.
Args:
template: Filename of the template notebook.
params: Analysis-specific parameters to inject.
output_filename: Filename for the executed output notebook.
template_dir: Directory containing template notebooks.
output_dir: Directory to write executed notebooks.
run_id: Unique identifier for this pipeline run.
runner_id: Worker ID (for parallel execution logging).
analysis_category: Category label injected into the notebook.
Returns:
Absolute path of the executed output notebook.
"""
input_path = os.path.join(template_dir, template)
output_path = os.path.join(output_dir, output_filename)
# Inject tracking IDs so every output notebook knows its provenance
params["run_id"] = run_id
params["runner_id"] = runner_id
params["analysis_category"] = analysis_category
print(f" [PID {os.getpid()}] Running: {output_filename}")
pm.execute_notebook(
input_path=input_path,
output_path=output_path,
parameters=params,
progress_bar=False,
cwd=template_dir, # ensures relative imports inside notebook work
)
return output_path
# ── Parallel pipeline orchestration ───────────────────────────────────────
def run_pipeline_parallel(
categories: list[dict],
template_dir: str,
output_dir: str,
run_id: str,
workers: int = 4,
) -> list[str]:
"""
Run multiple analysis categories in parallel via multiprocessing.Pool.
Each category is an independent analysis — no data dependencies between
them — making this an embarrassingly parallel workload.
Args:
categories: List of {"name": str, "template": str, "params": dict}
template_dir: Shared directory of template notebooks.
output_dir: Shared output directory.
run_id: Run identifier (same for all categories this run).
workers: Process pool size.
Returns:
List of output notebook paths.
"""
timestamp = datetime.now().strftime("%Y%m%d_%H%M%S")
tasks = []
for idx, cat in enumerate(categories):
output_name = f"{cat['name']}_{timestamp}.ipynb"
tasks.append((
cat["template"],
cat.get("params", {}),
output_name,
template_dir,
output_dir,
run_id,
f"worker_{idx}",
cat["name"],
))
with multiprocessing.Pool(processes=min(workers, len(tasks))) as pool:
results = pool.starmap(run_notebook, tasks)
return results
# ── Example usage ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
#
# categories = [
# {"name": "headlines", "template": "headlines.ipynb", "params": {"date": "2025-01-15"}},
# {"name": "generalisation", "template": "generalisation.ipynb", "params": {"date": "2025-01-15"}},
# {"name": "misrepresentation","template": "misrepresentation.ipynb","params": {"date": "2025-01-15"}},
# {"name": "negative_aspects", "template": "negative_aspects.ipynb", "params": {"date": "2025-01-15"}},
# ]
# outputs = run_pipeline_parallel(categories, template_dir="templates/", output_dir="output/", run_id="run_001")import subprocess
def run_analysis(notebook, date):
# nbconvert discards intermediate cell outputs
subprocess.run([
"jupyter", "nbconvert", "--to", "script",
"--execute", notebook
]) # no output notebook saved
def run_all(notebooks, date):
for nb in notebooks: # sequential only
run_analysis(nb, date)
# one failure stalls all remaining notebooksThe Impact
Papermill's parameter injection and output notebook pattern eliminates both the state-loss problem of nbconvert and the code-duplication problem of per-category scripts. multiprocessing.Pool turns a sequential daily job into a parallel one with zero logic changes.