Integrated Reasoning V2

Integrated Reasoning v2 (IR-v2)

Meta-orchestration guide for choosing optimal reasoning patterns. Analyzes problem characteristics and recommends which cognitive methodology to use.

When to Use

Invoke when facing complex problems and unsure which reasoning approach fits best. IR-v2 scores 11 dimensions and selects the optimal pattern.

Available Patterns

Quick Selection Guide

"I need the BEST option"           → ToT
"I need ALL options"               → BoT
"I need to trace step by step"     → SRC
"I need to find THE CAUSE"         → HE
"I need to VALIDATE a solution"    → AR
"I'm stuck between two approaches" → DR
"This is completely novel"         → AT
"I need to decide NOW"             → RTR
"Multiple stakeholders must agree" → NDF

Dimension Scoring (0-5)

Before selecting a pattern, score these dimensions:

1. Sequential Dependencies - Do steps depend on previous results?
2. Criteria Clarity - How clear are success criteria?
3. Solution Space Known - Are possible solutions well-defined?
4. Single Answer Needed - Is one best answer required?
5. Evidence Available - Can hypotheses be tested?
6. Opposing Valid Views - Are there legitimate tensions?
7. Problem Novelty - How unprecedented is this?
8. Robustness Required - Must solution withstand attack?
9. Solution Exists - Is there already a proposed solution?
10. Time Pressure - How urgent is the decision?
11. Stakeholder Complexity - How many parties must agree?

Pattern Affinity Formulas

ToT = (CriteriaClarity × 0.35) + (SingleAnswer × 0.30) + (SolutionSpaceKnown × 0.20) + (SequentialDeps × 0.15)

BoT = (1-SingleAnswer × 0.35) + (ProblemNovelty × 0.30) + (1-CriteriaClarity × 0.20) + (SequentialDeps × 0.15)

SRC = (SequentialDeps × 0.45) + (CriteriaClarity × 0.25) + (EvidenceAvailable × 0.20) + (RobustnessRequired × 0.10)

HE = (EvidenceAvailable × 0.40) + (CriteriaClarity × 0.30) + (SequentialDeps × 0.20) + (RobustnessRequired × 0.10)

AR = SolutionExists >= 3 ? (RobustnessRequired × 0.45) + (EvidenceAvailable × 0.25) + (CriteriaClarity × 0.20) + (1-TimePressure × 0.10) : 0

DR = (OpposingValidViews × 0.50) + (CriteriaClarity × 0.20) + (1-SingleAnswer × 0.15) + (1-TimePressure × 0.15)

AT = (ProblemNovelty × 0.45) + (1-SolutionSpaceKnown × 0.30) + (1-CriteriaClarity × 0.15) + (EvidenceAvailable × 0.10)

RTR = (TimePressure × 0.50) + (CriteriaClarity × 0.25) + (RobustnessRequired × 0.15) + (SequentialDeps × 0.10)

NDF = StakeholderComplexity >= 3 ? (StakeholderComplexity × 0.50) + (OpposingValidViews × 0.25) + (1-TimePressure × 0.15) + (CriteriaClarity × 0.10) : 0

Parallel Execution

When top 2 patterns score within 0.3 of each other:

1. Run both patterns in parallel
2. Compare outputs for agreement/disagreement
3. Use consensus or vote to determine final answer
4. Calibrate confidence based on agreement level

Usage Example

User: "Should we use microservices or monolith for our new app?"

IR-v2 Analysis:
- Sequential Dependencies: 2 (independent evaluation)
- Criteria Clarity: 3 (some clear, some subjective)
- Solution Space Known: 5 (two options)
- Single Answer Needed: 5 (must pick one)
- Opposing Valid Views: 4 (both have merit)

Top Patterns:
1. DR = 3.85 (opposing valid views present)
2. ToT = 3.60 (clear options to evaluate)

Recommendation: Use DR to synthesize trade-offs, then ToT to score final decision.

Output Format

When invoked, provide:

1. Dimension scores with reasoning
2. Pattern affinity calculations
3. Top 2-3 recommended patterns
4. Suggested execution approach
5. Confidence level (low/medium/high)