yogsoth-ai Adversarial Debate Protocol
A formal three-role debate structure ensuring decisions survive rigorous adversarial challenge. The protocol assigns distinct roles (advocate, critic, judge) to prevent confirmation bias and ensure intellectual honesty.
Stages
- Advocate Construction — Build the strongest possible case for the position under debate
- Critic Attack — Attack the advocate's case from multiple angles with severity ratings
- Judge Verdict — Impartial assessment of advocate case vs critic attacks, rendering ACCEPT/REJECT/REVISE
- Iteration (if REVISE) — Advocate revises case, critic re-attacks, judge re-evaluates
Available SOPs
| SOP | Role | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| advocate-construction | Advocate | Build strongest case for position |
| critic-attack | Critic | Attack the case with rated arguments |
| judge-verdict | Judge | Render impartial verdict |
Execution Guidance
- Minimum 2 rounds before accepting ACCEPT verdict
- Critic must produce >= 3 distinct attack arguments per round
- Judge must address every critic argument explicitly
- If judge verdict is REVISE, advocate must address specific weaknesses identified
- Maximum 4 rounds before escalating to strategy level
Minimum Yield
- Advocate case with explicit evidence and reasoning
- Critic attacks with severity ratings (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
- Judge verdict (ACCEPT/REJECT/REVISE) with point-by-point reasoning
- Conditions for acceptance (if ACCEPT)
- Required modifications (if REVISE)
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| advocate-construction | Construct the strongest possible case for a rejected candidate or counter-position. |
| critic-attack | Attack an advocate's case with multiple arguments rated by severity. |
| judge-verdict | Render an impartial verdict on advocate case vs critic attacks with explicit reasoning. |