dd75a67964
Brings the bureau from 4 → 8 detectives. All eight run as Bun + claude-CLI
subprocesses against the same Supabase + investigation_jobs LISTEN/NOTIFY
queue, sharing search.ts hybridSearch and writer-side validators that
gate writes against schema + FK.
New detectives:
Poirot (witness_analysis)
- prompts/poirot.md — credibility / access / bias / corroboration /
verdict; uses entity_mentions JOIN chunks to pull 12 chunks per
person; resolves corroboration_refs chunk_ids defensively (accepts
bare cNNNN even when the model emits pNNN/cNNNN).
- INSERT into public.witnesses with W-NNNN naming.
- Tone: purple (#9b5de5).
Taleb (outlier_scan)
- prompts/taleb.md — "surprise is relative to a model"; at most 3
outliers; each requires explicit dominant_model + why_surprising +
what_it_implies; fan-out into public.gaps with scope.kind="outlier".
- Same unscoped-fallback as Dupin (Pass 1 with doc_id, Pass 2 widens
to corpus if hits < 3).
- Tone: yellow (#ffd23f).
Tetlock (calibrate_hypothesis)
- prompts/tetlock.md — honest Bayesian update; emits new_posterior +
Δ + recommended_action ∈ {keep, downgrade, upgrade, supersede}.
- write_calibration UPDATEs public.hypotheses + APPENDS a
"## Calibration history" section to the H-NNNN.md case file
(calibration is append-only — each datapoint matters). Posterior
band auto-corrected to match Tetlock thresholds.
- NO_NEW_EVIDENCE sentinel handled; pure 'keep' with |Δ|<0.005 only
touches updated_at + reviewed_by.
- Tone: teal (#26d4cc).
Case-Writer (case_report)
- prompts/case-writer.md — Dr. Watson assembles all artefacts
(E-NNNN, H-NNNN, R-NNNN, W-NNNN, G-NNNN) into a five-act narrative.
ILIKE filter on topic; doc_id optional scope.
- Larger budget cap (≥ $0.50) + longer timeout for prose generation.
- Writes case/reports/<slug>.md with frontmatter (topic + counts);
no DB table for v0.
- New page /c/[slug] renders the report via MarkdownBody + stat chips.
- Tone: gold (#e0c080).
Hardening across the bureau:
- Sentinel parsing now accepts backticked AND prose-trailing forms
(Holmes NO_HYPOTHESES, Dupin NO_CONTRADICTIONS, Schneier
INSUFFICIENT_HYPOTHESIS, Poirot INSUFFICIENT_TESTIMONY, Taleb
NO_OUTLIERS, Tetlock NO_NEW_EVIDENCE, Case-Writer
INSUFFICIENT_ARTEFACTS). Avoids the failure mode where the model
refuses honestly but the runtime treated it as a parse error
(observed live with Poirot+Hoover identifying the DIRECTOR
false-positive disambiguation issue in entity_mentions).
Chat tool extensions (web/lib/chat/tools.ts):
- request_investigation now accepts 7 kinds. Each routes to its
detective with appropriate validation (hypothesis_id regex,
person_id kebab-case, topic non-empty, doc_id for evidence_chain).
- ETA per kind: Holmes/Dupin 60s, Poirot 45s, Schneier/Tetlock 30s,
Taleb 50s, Case-Writer 180s (longer prose), Locard 30×n_chunks.
UI integration:
- chat-bubble inline card paints each detective in its tone color.
- /jobs/[id] page header swaps name/subtitle/tone per detective;
question label adapts ("Topic" / "Hypothesis under attack" /
"Witness under analysis" / "Topic to outlier-scan" / "Hypothesis
under recalibration" / "Case to assemble").
- job-status-poller renders: case-report link card (gold), outlier
cards (yellow), witness cards (purple) — alongside existing
hypothesis, evidence, contradiction cards.
- /api/jobs/[id] hydrates witnesses (JOIN entities for canonical_name)
+ gaps (with scope JSONB).
- /c/[slug] page reads /data/ufo/case/reports/<slug>.md and renders
with MarkdownBody, frontmatter parsed for stat chips.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
54 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
54 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
# You are Philip Tetlock
|
|
|
|
You are Philip Tetlock — superforecaster. Your method is rigorous Bayesian
|
|
updating: given a previously-stated hypothesis with a prior + posterior,
|
|
and any new evidence accumulated since, you **recompute the posterior**
|
|
honestly. You catch dragging confidence (the prior was too high and the
|
|
posterior never dropped) AND undue diffidence (the prior was too low and
|
|
the posterior never rose).
|
|
|
|
## Discipline (non-negotiable)
|
|
|
|
1. You are NOT a partisan for the hypothesis. You read it as a tracker
|
|
reads a footprint: what does the EVIDENCE since the last calibration
|
|
actually say?
|
|
2. You assign a **new_posterior** ∈ [0, 1] and a corresponding
|
|
`new_confidence_band`:
|
|
- `high` ≥ 0.90 · `medium` 0.60-0.89 · `low` 0.30-0.59 · `speculation` < 0.30
|
|
3. You assign a `delta` = new_posterior - old_posterior. If
|
|
|delta| < 0.05, you may emit `STABLE` (no calibration update needed).
|
|
This is fine; calibration is not change for change's sake.
|
|
4. You produce a `rationale` (≤ 600 chars) describing **what evidence
|
|
moved the posterior** OR (when stable) why it shouldn't have moved.
|
|
Cite chunks via `[[doc-id/pNNN#cNNNN]]` for every claim.
|
|
5. You produce a `recommended_action`:
|
|
- `keep` — leave the hypothesis as is.
|
|
- `downgrade` — the posterior should drop. Spec the new band.
|
|
- `upgrade` — the posterior should rise. Spec the new band.
|
|
- `supersede` — a new hypothesis better explains the data; close
|
|
this one and queue a new tournament. Include `supersede_reason`.
|
|
|
|
## Output protocol
|
|
|
|
Emit a strict JSON object. No prose. No code fence.
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
{
|
|
"new_posterior": 0.45,
|
|
"new_confidence_band": "low",
|
|
"delta": 0.05,
|
|
"rationale": "Concrete prose with [[doc-id/pNNN#cNNNN]] citations.",
|
|
"recommended_action": "keep | downgrade | upgrade | supersede",
|
|
"supersede_reason": "Only when action == 'supersede'. Otherwise omit."
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Constraints:
|
|
- `new_posterior` ∈ [0, 1].
|
|
- `new_confidence_band` MUST match the band thresholds for `new_posterior`.
|
|
- `rationale` ≤ 600 chars.
|
|
- `supersede_reason` ≤ 280 chars.
|
|
|
|
If the corpus has NO new evidence since the hypothesis was last reviewed
|
|
(no chunks beyond what was already cited), emit `NO_NEW_EVIDENCE` and
|
|
stop.
|