DHDNA Profiler — Cognitive Pattern Extraction
A structured system for extracting the cognitive fingerprint of any text's author. Based on the Digital Human DNA (DHDNA) framework — the theory that every mind has a unique signature pattern expressed through how it reasons, decides, values, and communicates.
Published research: DHDNA Pre-print (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18736629) | IDNA Consolidation v2 (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18807387)
Core Concept
Just as biological DNA encodes physical identity through base pairs, Digital Human DNA encodes cognitive identity through thinking patterns. Every person's combination of analytical depth, creative range, emotional processing, strategic thinking, and ethical reasoning creates a unique cognitive signature — as distinctive as a fingerprint.
The profiler doesn't judge thinking as "good" or "bad." It maps the topology of how a mind works.
The 12 Cognitive Dimensions
When profiling text, score each dimension on a 1–10 scale based on evidence in the text:
| # |
Dimension |
What It Measures |
Low Score (1-3) |
High Score (8-10) |
| 1 |
Analytical Depth |
Logical rigor, structured reasoning, causal chains |
Intuitive, holistic, pattern-based |
Systematic, proof-oriented, precise |
| 2 |
Creative Range |
Novelty of connections, metaphor use, lateral thinking |
Conventional, incremental |
Paradigm-breaking, cross-domain synthesis |
| 3 |
Emotional Processing |
Emotional vocabulary, empathy signals, affect integration |
Detached, clinical |
Emotionally rich, feeling-integrated |
| 4 |
Linguistic Precision |
Vocabulary sophistication, sentence architecture, rhetoric |
Simple, direct |
Architecturally complex, nuanced |
| 5 |
Ethical Reasoning |
Values signals, fairness concern, consequence awareness |
Pragmatic, outcome-focused |
Principle-driven, justice-oriented |
| 6 |
Strategic Thinking |
Long-term planning, competitive awareness, resource optimization |
Tactical, reactive |
Multi-move, game-theoretic |
| 7 |
Memory Integration |
Reference to past experience, historical patterns, continuity |
Present-focused |
Deep historical awareness, precedent-driven |
| 8 |
Social Intelligence |
Audience awareness, perspective-taking, relational framing |
Self-referential |
Deeply other-aware, coalition-building |
| 9 |
Domain Expertise |
Technical depth, specialized knowledge, jargon confidence |
Generalist |
Deep specialist |
| 10 |
Intuitive Reasoning |
Gut-feel signals, heuristic shortcuts, pattern leaps |
Methodical, step-by-step |
Leap-of-faith, insight-driven |
| 11 |
Temporal Orientation |
Time-horizon of thinking — past, present, or future focus |
Present-anchored |
Time-spanning, historical-to-futurist |
| 12 |
Metacognition |
Self-awareness of own thinking, uncertainty acknowledgment |
Unreflective |
Deeply self-aware, thinks about thinking |
The 6 Tension Pairs
Dimensions exist in tension — high scores on one often correlate with lower scores on its pair. These tensions ARE the cognitive signature:
| Pair |
Tension |
What It Reveals |
| DIM 1 ↔ DIM 10 |
Analytical ↔ Intuitive |
Logic vs. Gut — how the mind reaches conclusions |
| DIM 3 ↔ DIM 6 |
Emotional ↔ Strategic |
Heart vs. Head — what drives decisions |
| DIM 2 ↔ DIM 5 |
Creative ↔ Ethical |
Freedom vs. Framework — innovation within or beyond rules |
| DIM 4 ↔ DIM 12 |
Linguistic ↔ Metacognitive |
Expression vs. Self-Awareness — external craft vs. internal reflection |
| DIM 7 ↔ DIM 11 |
Memory ↔ Temporal |
Past vs. Time Itself — experience vs. time-horizon |
| DIM 8 ↔ DIM 9 |
Social ↔ Domain |
Breadth vs. Depth — people skills vs. technical mastery |
How to Profile
Phase 1 — Evidence Collection
Read the text carefully. For each dimension, identify specific textual evidence:
- Direct quotes that demonstrate the dimension
- Structural patterns (how arguments are built)
- What's present AND what's absent (gaps reveal as much as content)
- Recurring patterns across multiple passages
Phase 2 — Scoring
For each of the 12 dimensions:
- Score 1-10 based on evidence
- Cite the strongest textual evidence for that score
- Flag confidence level: HIGH (multiple clear signals), MEDIUM (some signals), LOW (inferred)
Phase 3 — Pattern Synthesis
After scoring, identify:
Dominant Pattern: The 2-3 highest-scoring dimensions — this is the mind's "home base"
Shadow Pattern: The 2-3 lowest-scoring dimensions — this is where the mind doesn't naturally go
Signature Tensions: Which tension pairs show the widest gap? These define the cognitive style more than any individual score.
Reasoning Topology: How does the mind move through ideas?
- Linear (A → B → C → conclusion)
- Spiral (approaches the same idea from multiple angles, each time deeper)
- Web (connects disparate domains into synthesis)
- Dialectic (thesis → antithesis → synthesis)
- Fractal (same pattern at micro and macro levels)
Decision Fingerprint: When facing choices, does this mind:
- Analyze first, then decide? (Analytical-dominant)
- Feel first, then rationalize? (Emotional-dominant)
- Envision the outcome first, then work backward? (Strategic-dominant)
- Question the question itself? (Metacognitive-dominant)
Phase 4 — Profile Output
Present the profile as:
═══════════════════════════════════════════
DHDNA COGNITIVE PROFILE
Subject: [Name or "Anonymous"]
Text analyzed: [N words / N paragraphs]
Confidence: [HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW]
═══════════════════════════════════════════
DIMENSION SCORES:
1. Analytical Depth ···· [█████████·] 9/10
2. Creative Range ······ [███████···] 7/10
... (all 12)
TENSION MAP:
Analytical ████████░░ ↔ ░░████████ Intuitive
Emotional ███░░░░░░░ ↔ ░░░░░░████ Strategic
... (all 6 pairs)
DOMINANT PATTERN: [Top 2-3 dimensions]
SHADOW PATTERN: [Bottom 2-3 dimensions]
REASONING TOPOLOGY: [Linear / Spiral / Web / Dialectic / Fractal]
DECISION FINGERPRINT: [Analyze-first / Feel-first / Envision-first / Question-first]
NARRATIVE SYNTHESIS:
[2-3 paragraph natural language description of how this mind works,
what makes it distinctive, and what it might miss]
KEY QUOTES:
[3-5 most revealing quotes with dimension attribution]
═══════════════════════════════════════════
Comparison Mode
When the user provides two or more texts from different authors, produce individual profiles and then a comparison synthesis:
- Where do the minds converge? (shared high dimensions)
- Where do they diverge? (opposing scores on the same dimension)
- Which tension pairs would create productive disagreement?
- If these minds were in a room together, what would the conversation look like?
Self-Profile Mode
If the user asks to profile their own thinking (using the conversation history as text), be transparent:
- Ask before reading back through the conversation. Say what you intend to use as source
material and wait for an answer. Prior turns were written for a different purpose, and mining
them for psychological inference is not something to do silently.
- Score based on the conversation so far
- Acknowledge that conversational text may not represent the full range
- Note that people often think differently when writing for an AI vs. writing for humans
- Offer to re-profile if the user provides other writing samples
Consent and Scope
This skill infers personal cognitive and psychological attributes. That is a different thing from
summarizing a document, and the boundaries matter:
- Profile the text the user brings you for the current request. Do not go looking for more
material about the same author — other files, earlier sessions, or anything you happened to read.
- A profile of a third party is speculative and must say so. When the author is someone who is
not in the conversation and has not agreed to be analyzed — a colleague from a forwarded email, a
candidate from an application, an author from a paper — label the output as an inference from one
text sample, not a finding about that person.
- Decline profiling that feeds a consequential decision about someone. Hiring, promotion,
admission, clinical, disciplinary, or credit decisions are out of bounds; this framework has no
validation supporting that use, and a 1–10 cognitive score reads as far more authoritative than
it is.
- Everything stays local to the session. Profiles are not written anywhere the user did not ask
for and are not sent to any service.
What This Is NOT
- Not a personality test (MBTI, Big Five, etc.) — those measure behavioral tendencies, DHDNA measures cognitive architecture
- Not a judgment of intelligence — a chess grandmaster and a poet may score very differently but both demonstrate profound cognitive capability
- Not static — a person's DHDNA evolves as they learn, experience, and grow. A profile is a snapshot, not a destiny.
Built By
AHK Strategies — AI Horizon Knowledge
Full platform: themindbook.app
Research: DHDNA Paper (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18736629)
1---
2name: dhdna-profiler
3description: Extract cognitive patterns and thinking fingerprints from any text. Use this skill when the user wants to analyze how someone thinks, understand cognitive style, profile writing or speech patterns, compare thinking styles between people, asks "what's my thinking style", "analyze how this person reasons", "cognitive profile", "thinking pattern", "DHDNA", "digital DNA", or wants to understand the mind behind any text. Also trigger when the user provides text and wants deeper insight into the author's reasoning patterns, decision-making style, or cognitive signature.
4allowed-tools: Read Write
5license: MIT license
6metadata:
7 version: "1.1"
8 skill-author: AHK Strategies (ashrafkahoush-ux)
9---
10
11# DHDNA Profiler — Cognitive Pattern Extraction
12
13A structured system for extracting the cognitive fingerprint of any text's author. Based on the Digital Human DNA (DHDNA) framework — the theory that every mind has a unique signature pattern expressed through how it reasons, decides, values, and communicates.
14
15Published research: [DHDNA Pre-print (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18736629)](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18736629) | [IDNA Consolidation v2 (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18807387)](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18807387)
16
17## Core Concept
18
19Just as biological DNA encodes physical identity through base pairs, Digital Human DNA encodes cognitive identity through thinking patterns. Every person's combination of analytical depth, creative range, emotional processing, strategic thinking, and ethical reasoning creates a **unique cognitive signature** — as distinctive as a fingerprint.
20
21The profiler doesn't judge thinking as "good" or "bad." It maps the topology of how a mind works.
22
23## The 12 Cognitive Dimensions
24
25When profiling text, score each dimension on a 1–10 scale based on evidence in the text:
26
27| # | Dimension | What It Measures | Low Score (1-3) | High Score (8-10) |
28| --- | ------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
29| 1 | **Analytical Depth** | Logical rigor, structured reasoning, causal chains | Intuitive, holistic, pattern-based | Systematic, proof-oriented, precise |
30| 2 | **Creative Range** | Novelty of connections, metaphor use, lateral thinking | Conventional, incremental | Paradigm-breaking, cross-domain synthesis |
31| 3 | **Emotional Processing** | Emotional vocabulary, empathy signals, affect integration | Detached, clinical | Emotionally rich, feeling-integrated |
32| 4 | **Linguistic Precision** | Vocabulary sophistication, sentence architecture, rhetoric | Simple, direct | Architecturally complex, nuanced |
33| 5 | **Ethical Reasoning** | Values signals, fairness concern, consequence awareness | Pragmatic, outcome-focused | Principle-driven, justice-oriented |
34| 6 | **Strategic Thinking** | Long-term planning, competitive awareness, resource optimization | Tactical, reactive | Multi-move, game-theoretic |
35| 7 | **Memory Integration** | Reference to past experience, historical patterns, continuity | Present-focused | Deep historical awareness, precedent-driven |
36| 8 | **Social Intelligence** | Audience awareness, perspective-taking, relational framing | Self-referential | Deeply other-aware, coalition-building |
37| 9 | **Domain Expertise** | Technical depth, specialized knowledge, jargon confidence | Generalist | Deep specialist |
38| 10 | **Intuitive Reasoning** | Gut-feel signals, heuristic shortcuts, pattern leaps | Methodical, step-by-step | Leap-of-faith, insight-driven |
39| 11 | **Temporal Orientation** | Time-horizon of thinking — past, present, or future focus | Present-anchored | Time-spanning, historical-to-futurist |
40| 12 | **Metacognition** | Self-awareness of own thinking, uncertainty acknowledgment | Unreflective | Deeply self-aware, thinks about thinking |
41
42### The 6 Tension Pairs
43
44Dimensions exist in tension — high scores on one often correlate with lower scores on its pair. These tensions ARE the cognitive signature:
45
46| Pair | Tension | What It Reveals |
47| -------------- | -------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
48| DIM 1 ↔ DIM 10 | Analytical ↔ Intuitive | Logic vs. Gut — how the mind reaches conclusions |
49| DIM 3 ↔ DIM 6 | Emotional ↔ Strategic | Heart vs. Head — what drives decisions |
50| DIM 2 ↔ DIM 5 | Creative ↔ Ethical | Freedom vs. Framework — innovation within or beyond rules |
51| DIM 4 ↔ DIM 12 | Linguistic ↔ Metacognitive | Expression vs. Self-Awareness — external craft vs. internal reflection |
52| DIM 7 ↔ DIM 11 | Memory ↔ Temporal | Past vs. Time Itself — experience vs. time-horizon |
53| DIM 8 ↔ DIM 9 | Social ↔ Domain | Breadth vs. Depth — people skills vs. technical mastery |
54
55## How to Profile
56
57### Phase 1 — Evidence Collection
58
59Read the text carefully. For each dimension, identify **specific textual evidence**:
60
61- Direct quotes that demonstrate the dimension
62- Structural patterns (how arguments are built)
63- What's present AND what's absent (gaps reveal as much as content)
64- Recurring patterns across multiple passages
65
66### Phase 2 — Scoring
67
68For each of the 12 dimensions:
69
701. Score 1-10 based on evidence
712. Cite the strongest textual evidence for that score
723. Flag confidence level: HIGH (multiple clear signals), MEDIUM (some signals), LOW (inferred)
73
74### Phase 3 — Pattern Synthesis
75
76After scoring, identify:
77
78**Dominant Pattern:** The 2-3 highest-scoring dimensions — this is the mind's "home base"
79
80**Shadow Pattern:** The 2-3 lowest-scoring dimensions — this is where the mind doesn't naturally go
81
82**Signature Tensions:** Which tension pairs show the widest gap? These define the cognitive style more than any individual score.
83
84**Reasoning Topology:** How does the mind move through ideas?
85
86- Linear (A → B → C → conclusion)
87- Spiral (approaches the same idea from multiple angles, each time deeper)
88- Web (connects disparate domains into synthesis)
89- Dialectic (thesis → antithesis → synthesis)
90- Fractal (same pattern at micro and macro levels)
91
92**Decision Fingerprint:** When facing choices, does this mind:
93
94- Analyze first, then decide? (Analytical-dominant)
95- Feel first, then rationalize? (Emotional-dominant)
96- Envision the outcome first, then work backward? (Strategic-dominant)
97- Question the question itself? (Metacognitive-dominant)
98
99### Phase 4 — Profile Output
100
101Present the profile as:
102
103```
104═══════════════════════════════════════════
105 DHDNA COGNITIVE PROFILE
106 Subject: [Name or "Anonymous"]
107 Text analyzed: [N words / N paragraphs]
108 Confidence: [HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW]
109═══════════════════════════════════════════
110
111DIMENSION SCORES:
112 1. Analytical Depth ···· [█████████·] 9/10
113 2. Creative Range ······ [███████···] 7/10
114 ... (all 12)
115
116TENSION MAP:
117 Analytical ████████░░ ↔ ░░████████ Intuitive
118 Emotional ███░░░░░░░ ↔ ░░░░░░████ Strategic
119 ... (all 6 pairs)
120
121DOMINANT PATTERN: [Top 2-3 dimensions]
122SHADOW PATTERN: [Bottom 2-3 dimensions]
123REASONING TOPOLOGY: [Linear / Spiral / Web / Dialectic / Fractal]
124DECISION FINGERPRINT: [Analyze-first / Feel-first / Envision-first / Question-first]
125
126NARRATIVE SYNTHESIS:
127[2-3 paragraph natural language description of how this mind works,
128what makes it distinctive, and what it might miss]
129
130KEY QUOTES:
131[3-5 most revealing quotes with dimension attribution]
132═══════════════════════════════════════════
133```
134
135## Comparison Mode
136
137When the user provides two or more texts from different authors, produce individual profiles and then a **comparison synthesis**:
138
139- Where do the minds converge? (shared high dimensions)
140- Where do they diverge? (opposing scores on the same dimension)
141- Which tension pairs would create productive disagreement?
142- If these minds were in a room together, what would the conversation look like?
143
144## Self-Profile Mode
145
146If the user asks to profile their own thinking (using the conversation history as text), be transparent:
147
148- **Ask before reading back through the conversation.** Say what you intend to use as source
149 material and wait for an answer. Prior turns were written for a different purpose, and mining
150 them for psychological inference is not something to do silently.
151- Score based on the conversation so far
152- Acknowledge that conversational text may not represent the full range
153- Note that people often think differently when writing for an AI vs. writing for humans
154- Offer to re-profile if the user provides other writing samples
155
156## Consent and Scope
157
158This skill infers personal cognitive and psychological attributes. That is a different thing from
159summarizing a document, and the boundaries matter:
160
161- **Profile the text the user brings you for the current request.** Do not go looking for more
162 material about the same author — other files, earlier sessions, or anything you happened to read.
163- **A profile of a third party is speculative and must say so.** When the author is someone who is
164 not in the conversation and has not agreed to be analyzed — a colleague from a forwarded email, a
165 candidate from an application, an author from a paper — label the output as an inference from one
166 text sample, not a finding about that person.
167- **Decline profiling that feeds a consequential decision about someone.** Hiring, promotion,
168 admission, clinical, disciplinary, or credit decisions are out of bounds; this framework has no
169 validation supporting that use, and a 1–10 cognitive score reads as far more authoritative than
170 it is.
171- **Everything stays local to the session.** Profiles are not written anywhere the user did not ask
172 for and are not sent to any service.
173
174## What This Is NOT
175
176- Not a personality test (MBTI, Big Five, etc.) — those measure behavioral tendencies, DHDNA measures cognitive architecture
177- Not a judgment of intelligence — a chess grandmaster and a poet may score very differently but both demonstrate profound cognitive capability
178- Not static — a person's DHDNA evolves as they learn, experience, and grow. A profile is a snapshot, not a destiny.
179
180## Built By
181
182[AHK Strategies](https://ahkstrategies.net) — AI Horizon Knowledge
183Full platform: [themindbook.app](https://themindbook.app)
184Research: [DHDNA Paper (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18736629)](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18736629)