strength-assessment

name	strength-assessment
description	Tactic for assessing argument strength — evaluate evidence quality, count independent sources, check for defeaters, assign calibrated confidence scores.
execution	tactic
dependencies	{"sops":["evidence-attachment","strength-scoring"]}

Strength Assessment

Evaluate the strength of claims based on their evidential support.

Minimum Yield

Must score ≥3 claims per invocation.

Protocol

1. For each claim, gather all linked evidence (supporting and contradicting)
2. Evaluate evidence quality:
   • Source reliability (peer-reviewed > preprint > blog)
   • Directness (direct test > indirect inference > analogy)
   • Independence (multiple independent sources > single source chain)
3. 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)
4. Assign strength score (0-10) with explicit reasoning via strength-scoring
5. 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 }

Available SOPs

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

SOP	When to use
evidence-attachment	SOP for attaching evidence to a claim — create typed edge (supported_by, contradicts, qualifies) with evidence quality metadata.
strength-scoring	SOP for assigning calibrated strength scores to claims — evaluate evidence weight, count independent sources, check defeaters, produce scored assessment.