de-anthropocentric-research-engine

Experiment-specific - summarize the DARE executor's research design into a clean research_result report, forced to write back into the spec file produced by formated-specs.

Experiment-specific - replaces writing-specs, emits DARE's 4-layer call plan as a clean research_graph schema. Last step forces load formated-result.

loss-1 judge - read a sample's full dialogue and decide whether the user simulator semantically enacted its Policy Card. check-blind.

loss-2 judge - pairwise quality comparison across the n rungs within one topic; decide monotonicity and endpoint separation. check-blind, D1-D5 only.

Strategy: 面对异常的最佳解释推理

Remove components one by one, observe system changes to reveal hidden dependencies and generate ideas from structural gaps.

Map system architecture to ablatable units for ablation studies

Design ablation studies to isolate component contributions in ML systems

Remove components one by one from a system, record the response/impact of each removal.

Classify assumptions on 2 axes — load-bearing (how much conclusion depends on it) × vulnerable (how likely to be false). Focuses attention on High-Load × High-Vulnerable quadrant.

Extract abstract principles from concrete domain cases. Strips domain-specific details to reveal transferable mechanisms.

Perform bisociation at multiple abstraction levels

Move between concrete and abstract framings — 3 levels up (Why?) and 3 levels down (How?) to find the most productive research level.

Abstract biological principle to design principle. Bridge from biology to engineering.

Compute Risk Priority Number (RPN = S x O x D), classify failure modes into H/M/L action priority per AIAG-VDA tables.

Enumerate all implementation activities from an experiment design

Understand who the user is — background, resources, constraints, and deep motivations. Produces an ActorProfile that informs all downstream decisions. Use this tactic at the start of any crystallization process to build a model of the user's capabilities, limitations, and intent.

Iteratively select maximally informative pairs, execute comparisons, update ratings, and check convergence until ranking stabilizes.

Structured debate protocol that constructs an advocate, deploys critic attacks, and renders a judge verdict through iterative rounds.

Strategy: Progressive pressure escalation — starts with surface-level challenges and escalates to fundamental assumption attacks based on defender confidence decay.

Strategy: Role-play attacks from hostile personas — competing lab researcher, hostile reviewer, funding skeptic, domain outsider — each with distinct attack motivations and blind spots.

Tactic: Construct detailed hostile persona, attack artifact from that persona's perspective, record successful attack paths for aggregation.

Campaign: Logical extreme and boundary testing via reductio ad absurdum and edge-case analysis. Core question: Does this artifact collapse under logical limits and boundary conditions? Methods: Lakatos 1976, Dutilh Novaes 2016, BVA, Flyvbjerg Critical Case, Popper.

Construct the strongest possible case for a rejected candidate or counter-position.