| name | strength-assessment |
| description | Tactic for assessing argument strength — evaluate evidence quality, count independent sources, check for defeaters, assign calibrated confidence scores. |
| execution | tactic |
| used-by | evidence-linking-arg, argument-synthesis |
Strength Assessment
Evaluate the strength of claims based on their evidential support.
Minimum Yield
Must score ≥3 claims per invocation.
Protocol
- For each claim, gather all linked evidence (supporting and contradicting)
- Evaluate evidence quality:
- Source reliability (peer-reviewed > preprint > blog)
- Directness (direct test > indirect inference > analogy)
- Independence (multiple independent sources > single source chain)
- Check for defeaters:
- Undercutting defeaters (evidence that the support doesn't actually support)
- Rebutting defeaters (evidence directly contradicting the claim)
- Undermining defeaters (evidence that the evidence itself is unreliable)
- Assign strength score (0-10) with explicit reasoning via
strength-scoring
- Flag claims with score < 3 as "weak" and claims with score > 7 as "strong"
SOPs Used
- strength-scoring — assign and record strength scores
- evidence-attachment — create additional evidence links discovered during assessment
Yield Report
Returns: { claims_scored: number, strong_claims: number, weak_claims: number, defeaters_found: number }