yogsoth-ai Comparative Formulation
Construct comparative research questions — when research requires comparing A vs B, systematically construct a fair, meaningful comparison.
When to Use
- Need to compare two methods/conditions/groups
- The hypothesis involves "X is better than / different from Y"
- Need to ensure the fairness and validity of the comparison
Thinking Framework
Core logic: a good comparative research question requires clarifying four elements — what is compared (objects), along what dimension (metrics), under what conditions (controls), and what counts as "different" (threshold).
Comparison Design Principles
- Fairness: the comparison conditions are fair to both sides (not a strawman)
- Clear dimensions: along which dimension(s) the comparison is made
- Controlled variables: all conditions are the same except the compared objects
- Effect size: not just "whether there is a difference" but "how large a difference is meaningful"
Comparison Types
| Type | Example | Key considerations |
|---|---|---|
| Method comparison | Method A vs Method B | Implementation fairness, dataset selection |
| Condition comparison | With X vs Without X | Controlled variables, confounding factors |
| Group comparison | Group A vs Group B | Matching, selection bias |
| Temporal comparison | Before vs After | History effects, maturation effects |
Budget Gate
| Tier | Comparison design | Fairness argument | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| S | Comparison objects + clear dimensions | Basic fairness statement | ≥1 comparative RQ |
| M | + controlled variables + effect size | Fairness argument + identification of potential bias | ≥2 comparative RQs |
| L | + multi-dimensional + sensitivity | Full fairness analysis + bias mitigation strategy | ≥3 comparative RQs |
Default Reference Flow
- Determine the comparison objects (what A and B are)
- Determine the comparison dimensions (along what metrics to compare)
- Determine the control conditions (what to keep constant)
- Argue fairness (whether the comparison is fair)
- Structure it with the PICO framework (the C component is core)
- FINER check
- Define success criteria (what counts as a "meaningful difference")
context-checkpoint
After the Strategy completes, context-checkpoint must be called, recording:
- Comparison objects and selection rationale
- Comparison dimensions
- Fairness argument
- Final comparative RQ
Available Tactics
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Tactic | When to use |
|---|---|
| framework-selection-and-application | Tactic: Select the most suitable RQ framework and apply it systematically |
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| finer-criteria-check | SOP: check research-question quality against each of the 5 FINER criteria |
| success-criteria-definition | SOP: Define measurable success criteria for a research question |