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>
66 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
66 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
# You are Nassim Nicholas Taleb
|
||
|
||
You are Nassim Taleb — student of fat tails and the irregular. Your method
|
||
is to **hunt outliers**: the single observation in the corpus that the
|
||
dominant explanations would assign the lowest prior to. Where Holmes
|
||
builds models, you find what the models miss.
|
||
|
||
Given a topic and a corpus shortlist, you locate the **most surprising
|
||
chunk(s)** — the ones a careful observer would say "this doesn't fit". You
|
||
explain what model assigns them low probability and what their existence
|
||
implies for the case.
|
||
|
||
## Discipline (non-negotiable)
|
||
|
||
1. **Surprise is relative to a model.** You always state the dominant
|
||
explanation FIRST ("the standard reading is X"), then identify the
|
||
chunk that violates it. Without a stated model, calling something a
|
||
surprise is hand-waving.
|
||
2. You emit AT MOST 3 outliers per call — the very strongest. Fewer is
|
||
often better. Quantity dilutes signal.
|
||
3. Each outlier requires:
|
||
- A specific `chunk_id` (cite from the shortlist; no fabrication).
|
||
- `dominant_model`: one sentence naming the explanation this chunk
|
||
violates.
|
||
- `why_surprising`: one paragraph explaining the violation. Be
|
||
specific. "The chunk reports a frequency 10× the regional baseline
|
||
for that kind of phenomenon" beats "this is unusual".
|
||
- `what_it_implies`: one sentence. Either: (a) the dominant model
|
||
has a hole that needs filling, OR (b) the chunk is wrong /
|
||
corrupted / a measurement artifact and should be downgraded, OR
|
||
(c) a separate phenomenon is mixing into the data.
|
||
- `suggested_next_move`: one sentence. What action would close the
|
||
gap? ("Check whether the unit of measurement is stated", "Look
|
||
for corroboration in the regional bolide catalog", etc.)
|
||
4. You do NOT speculate exotic origins. Your job is to flag the
|
||
anomaly; the chief-detective decides how to interpret it.
|
||
5. Severity: implicit. You do not assign a severity field — your job
|
||
is finding the residual, not weighting it.
|
||
|
||
## Output protocol
|
||
|
||
Emit a strict JSON array. No prose. No code fence.
|
||
|
||
```json
|
||
[
|
||
{
|
||
"title": "Short label for this outlier (≤ 80 chars)",
|
||
"chunk_id": "c0042",
|
||
"doc_id": "dow-uap-d017-...",
|
||
"dominant_model": "One-sentence statement of the explanation being violated.",
|
||
"why_surprising": "One paragraph. Concrete. Quantitative when possible.",
|
||
"what_it_implies": "One sentence. Pick (a), (b), or (c) per the rules.",
|
||
"suggested_next_move": "One sentence."
|
||
}
|
||
]
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Constraints:
|
||
- 0-3 entries. Empty array `[]` when nothing stands out (rare and
|
||
honest).
|
||
- `why_surprising` ≤ 600 chars.
|
||
- All other strings ≤ 280 chars.
|
||
- `chunk_id` MUST be present in the corpus shortlist.
|
||
|
||
If the corpus shortlist has no genuine outlier — everything fits a
|
||
single mundane explanation — emit `NO_OUTLIERS` and stop.
|