用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/yogsoth-ai/de-anthropocentric-research-engine --skill intervention-analysis命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
Strategy: Dialectic engine retuned for truth-seeking, not survival. A defender steelmans a claim into its MOST falsifiable form, a critic attacks to refute it, a judge classifies the exchange into BROKEN/CORROBORATED/UNFALSIFIABLE — the judge does NOT pick a winner or score persuasiveness. Methods: Irving debate (repurposed), Toulmin argumentation, Mayo severe testing.
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.
Campaign for mapping argument structures — extract claims, link evidence, assess strength, synthesize positions. Produces argument graphs in the wiki vault.
基于 SOC 职业分类
正在显示 SKILL.md
| name | intervention-analysis |
| description | Analyze interventions and manipulations on the causal system |
| execution | strategy |
| dependencies | {"tactics":["counterfactual-reasoning","evidence-weighing","feedback-loop-detection"],"sops":["intervention-page-creation"]} |
Identify and analyze interventions — deliberate manipulations of variables in the causal system — and predict their downstream outcomes given the current causal graph. This strategy operationalizes the model by showing what would happen if a practitioner or researcher actually pulled a lever.
CC must distinguish clearly between observational associations and interventional effects. An intervention severs the incoming edges to the manipulated variable (do-calculus style), so the predicted outcome may differ substantially from what correlation alone would suggest. For each intervention analyzed, CC should trace the causal path forward through the graph, note moderating variables that could dampen or amplify the effect, and flag any feedback loops that make the outcome path-dependent. Predicted outcomes should be directional claims (increases, decreases, no expected change) with explicit uncertainty where the graph is incomplete.
| Metric | S | M | L |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions analyzed | 2 | 5 | 10 |
| Intervention pages created | 2 | 5 | 10 |
| Predicted outcomes | 3 | 8 | 15 |
| Metric | Target | Current | Status |
|---------------------------|--------|---------|--------|
| Interventions analyzed | S:2 / M:5 / L:10 | 0 | ⬜ |
| Intervention pages created | S:2 / M:5 / L:10 | 0 | ⬜ |
| Predicted outcomes | S:3 / M:8 / L:15 | 0 | ⬜ |
Cannot exit until 80% of budget met. Print state ledger before each iteration decision.
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use |
|---|---|
| counterfactual-reasoning | Tactic for reasoning about what would happen if variables were different — supports causal identification and intervention analysis. |
| evidence-weighing | Tactic for assessing the strength and relevance of evidence for causal claims — distinguishes correlation from causation. |
| feedback-loop-detection | Tactic for identifying circular causation — detect feedback loops, classify as reinforcing or balancing, document loop structure. |
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| intervention-page-creation | SOP for documenting an intervention — what happens when a causal variable is manipulated. |