storm-research

name	storm-research
description	斯坦福 STORM 多视角深度研究方法。通过 4 阶段顺序流水线（多视角扫描 → 矛盾地图 → 综合简报 → 同行评审）将 40+ 小时的研究压缩为几分钟。每阶段独立运行，后一阶段以前一阶段完整结果为上下文。适用于写文章前、重大决策前、投资前、谈判前、求职面试前、学习新领域前、演讲前的深度调研。触发关键词：STORM、深度研究、多视角研究、storm research、换个角度研究、全面分析这个、博士级研究、系统研究。

STORM Research Method

Stanford's STORM framework adapted as a 4-stage sequential pipeline. Published at NAACL 2024 by Stanford OVAL Lab.

Critical rule: stages must run sequentially. Each stage produces full-length output. The next stage receives the complete accumulated results as context. Never compress multiple stages into a single model call — that kills depth.

Output Destination

/Users/pixies/Library/Mobile Documents/iCloud~md~obsidian/Documents/Mydoc/Inbox/STORM-[主题]-[YYYY-MM-DD].md

Execution Protocol

Step 1: Get topic from user

Ask for the research topic. If the user provides a role (e.g. "我是出版人"), note it for Stage 3's actionable insight.

Step 2: Run Stage 1 — Multi-Perspective Scan

Load references/prompts.md. Send Prompt 1 to the model with the user's topic.

Collect the FULL output. Do not summarize or truncate.

Expected output: 5 perpectives (Practitioner, Scholar, Skeptic, Economist, Historian), each containing: 2-sentence core stance, strongest evidence, unique insight.

Step 3: Run Stage 2 — Contradiction Map

Send Prompt 2 to the model, preceded by the complete Stage 1 output. Format:

以下是第一阶段的多视角扫描结果：

[粘贴 Stage 1 完整输出]

---

基于上面的 5 个视角，绘制矛盾地图：
[Prompt 2 原文]

Collect the FULL output.

Expected output: direct contradictions with specific claims, evidence strength ranking with reasons, key question to resolve the biggest conflict, consensus among all 5, blind spots no one addressed.

Step 4: Run Stage 3 — Synthesis

Send Prompt 3 to the model, preceded by the complete Stage 1 + Stage 2 output. Use the user's role in the actionable insight section. Format:

以下是前两阶段的研究结果：

[粘贴 Stage 1 完整输出]

[粘贴 Stage 2 完整输出]

---

将以上 5 个视角和矛盾地图中的所有内容综合成一份研究简报：
[Prompt 3 原文，其中 [你的角色] 替换为用户角色]

Collect the FULL output.

Expected output: CEO summary, 5 key findings with supporter/skeptic per finding and reliability score (1-10), hidden connections, actionable insight, frontier question.

Step 5: Run Stage 4 — Peer Review

Send Prompt 4 to the model, preceded by the complete Stage 1 + Stage 2 + Stage 3 output.

Collect the FULL output.

Expected output: confidence score per finding with explanation, weakest claim and what's needed to verify, bias check with specific examples, missing 6th perspective, overall grade with what a Stanford professor would say.

Step 6: Assemble and Save

Merge all 4 stages into a single .md file with the structure below. Save to Vault. Notify user of path.

Output Structure

---
title: "STORM 研究：[主题]"
method: Stanford STORM
date: YYYY-MM-DD
---

# STORM 研究：[主题]

## 第一阶段：多视角扫描

### 1. 实践者
...
### 2. 学者
...
### 3. 怀疑论者
...
### 4. 经济学家
...
### 5. 历史学家
...

## 第二阶段：矛盾地图

...

## 第三阶段：研究简报

...

## 第四阶段：同行评审

...

Quality Checklist

After each stage, verify before proceeding:

• Each perspective has named entities (people, places, works, data)
• Arguments are specific, not generic platitudes
• Evidence is cited or described concretely
• Output feels like it was produced by someone with domain expertise

Extended Capabilities

Deeper Dive on One Perspective

If the user says "再深入 X 视角", load and use Prompt 5 from references/prompts.md.

Decision Support

If the user has a specific decision, after the 4 stages, load and use Prompt 6 from references/prompts.md. Triggered by keywords: "该不该"、"要不要"、"怎么选"、"决策"、"投资"、"谈判".

Reference

• Original paper: NAACL 2024, Stanford OVAL Lab
• Online tool: https://storm.genie.stanford.edu/
• Open source: https://github.com/stanford-oval/storm (MIT)