Intelligence-Research-OS

wiki/engineering/latest-memory.md

Intelligence Research OS — Latest Memory

Last Updated: 2026-05-22
Source provenance: latest embedded memory context in the Research workspace plus repository SESSION.md.

Recent Context Snapshot

The latest memory thread centers on a multi-agent research synthesis idea: run the same evidence through multiple analytical lenses so final synthesis is less brittle than a single-perspective summary.

Latest Concept Under Exploration

Five user-proposed archetypes are active in the latest memory:

Lens Job
Agreer / aligned perspective Identify the strongest case for the thesis or recommendation.
Contrarian Challenge consensus, assumptions, and overly convenient narratives.
Pessimist Map failure modes, operational risks, and reasons the recommendation may not work.
Optimist / positive enforcer Identify enabling conditions, upside, and why the recommendation could work.
Methodical expander Systematically expand implications, adjacent opportunities, and missing branches.

This maps closely to the already implemented Heavy Multi-POV Synthesis Studio, which currently uses six lenses: Builder, Contrarian, Failure Analyst, Operator, Methodical Expander, and Evidence Judge.

Interpretation

The latest memory does not require replacing the existing lens architecture. It suggests a refinement direction:

  • Treat the user-proposed archetypes as product-language or UX-language variants.
  • Keep the technical implementation as isolated, file-gated POV artifacts.
  • Preserve the Evidence Judge lens because it protects the core promise: source-backed intelligence rather than persuasive unsupported narrative.
  • Explore whether Optimist and Builder should be distinct lenses or a single lens with clearer prompt language.

Actionable Follow-Up

Before changing code, decide the canonical lens taxonomy:

  • Option A: keep current six-lens technical taxonomy.
  • Option B: rename Builder to Optimist / Positive Case for user clarity.
  • Option C: add Optimist as a seventh lens and keep Builder as an implementation/rollout lens.

Current recommendation: Option B. It preserves artifact count and audit simplicity while making the workbench language closer to the user's mental model.