yogsoth-ai Evidence Tournament Tactic
Structured evidence competition — gather, present, cross-examine, and judge evidence quality.
Orchestration
- evidence-scout searches for evidence supporting the artifact's claims
- evidence-scout searches for evidence opposing the artifact's claims
- debate-critic presents opposing evidence as structured arguments
- debate-defender presents supporting evidence as counter-arguments
- cross-examination probes both evidence sets:
- Source reliability assessment
- Relevance to specific claims
- Recency and applicability
- Potential confounds or alternative interpretations
- debate-judge scores each piece of evidence and produces tournament bracket result
Evidence Quality Criteria
- Relevance: Direct bearing on the claim (0.0–1.0)
- Reliability: Source credibility and methodology (0.0–1.0)
- Recency: Temporal applicability (0.0–1.0)
- Specificity: How precisely it addresses the claim (0.0–1.0)
Subagents Dispatched
- evidence-scout × 2 (pro and con evidence gathering)
- debate-critic (opposing evidence presentation)
- debate-defender (supporting evidence presentation)
- cross-examination (evidence probing)
- debate-judge (evidence scoring and verdict)
Termination Conditions
- All claims have been evidenced and cross-examined
- Evidence search budget exhausted (2/5/10 searches)
- No further relevant evidence discoverable
- Judge has scored all evidence pairs
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| cross-examination | Probes defender responses for inconsistencies, logical gaps, and unsupported claims. Acts as follow-up interrogation after initial defense. |
| debate-critic | Generates structured criticism from attack stance using Toulmin model. Produces claims, grounds, warrants, and rebuttals targeting artifact weaknesses. |
| debate-defender | Responds to attacks with counter-evidence and counter-arguments. Defends artifact using evidence, clarification, and rebuttal while acknowledging valid criticisms. |
| debate-judge | Evaluates debate exchanges, adjudicates argument quality, and produces round verdicts with confidence scores and reasoning. |
| evidence-scout | Searches for external evidence supporting or opposing specific claims. Returns structured evidence with source assessment and relevance scoring. |