yogsoth-ai Assumption Negation
Tactics
- contradiction-derivation
- counterexample-heuristics
Method
- Extract the core claim or assumption from the artifact
- Formally negate it (produce ~P from P)
- Derive logical consequences of ~P through deductive chains
- Evaluate whether derivation reaches genuine contradiction
- If contradiction found: original claim survives this test
- If no contradiction: claim may be contingent, not necessary
Budget
| Size | Negation chains | Max derivation depth |
|---|---|---|
| S | 3 | 5 steps |
| M | 6 | 8 steps |
| L | 10 | 12 steps |
Orchestration
- Dispatch
claim-negationto produce formal negation - For each negation, dispatch
deductive-chainto derive consequences - Dispatch
contradiction-detectionto evaluate results - If no contradiction, dispatch
claim-refinementfor weakened version
Subagents
- claim-negation
- deductive-chain
- contradiction-detection
- claim-refinement
Available Tactics
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use |
|---|---|
| contradiction-derivation | Negate a claim, derive logical consequences step by step, detect whether a genuine contradiction or absurdity emerges. |
| counterexample-heuristics | Generate counterexamples (monsters), attempt monster-barring, incorporate surviving counterexamples as lemma refinements (Lakatos method). |
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| claim-negation | Formally negate the core claim, producing the logical complement for reductio testing. |
| claim-refinement | Propose a refined claim that survives counterexamples while preserving maximum explanatory power (Lakatos lemma-incorporation). |
| contradiction-detection | Evaluate whether a derivation chain has reached a genuine contradiction, absurdity, or inconclusive state. |
| deductive-chain | Derive logical consequences step by step from a given premise, building a traceable derivation chain. |