yannsay's picture
Deploy clean to build-small-hackathon org (32B Qwen, step-3 table)
aa1d0aa verified
|
Raw
History Blame Contribute Delete
1.37 kB
# Step 4 β€” Analysis 🚧 NOT YET IMPLEMENTED
This reference is a **stub**. The analysis step is not yet bundled.
## What Step 4 will be
The grounded answer to the analyst's original question, produced only after Steps
1–3 have run. Its defining property is **discipline under coverage**: every claim is
caveated by the Step 3 binding verdict that supports it.
- Report what the bound dataset supports, with the relevant numbers.
- Flag explicitly what the data cannot prove (the Step 3 binding `absent` / `partial` gaps).
- Cite the catalog (Step 2) definition and threshold for any indicator or cutoff used β€”
never assert a threshold without its source.
- Commit to one coherent analytical angle grounded in what the instrument supports,
rather than offering the analyst a menu of options to choose from.
## Until it's implemented
Stop after the last implemented step and tell the analyst what the full pipeline
would do next.
## Porting notes (for whoever implements this)
The discipline prompt and analytical-spec approach live in the parent project:
`06_discipline_prompt/output/discipline_prompt.md` and
`07_step07_analysis_pipeline/` (where the agent writes its own analysis spec before
running numbers). The core finding to preserve: the agent must be *forced* to
consult the earlier steps β€” passive context does not change generative behaviour.