yogsoth-ai Tactic: Sensitivity Ranking
Orchestration Pattern
Quantify Resources → spawn
resource-quantification- For each identified constraint, quantify its current state (demand, supply, gap)
- Express gaps in comparable units where possible
Challenge Assumptions → spawn
assumption-challenging- For each constraint, identify the assumptions that make it binding
- Score assumption vulnerability (confidence × evidence / testability)
Identify Critical Chain Impact → spawn
critical-chain-identification- Determine which constraints lie on the critical chain
- Constraints on the critical chain have higher sensitivity
Compute Sensitivity Score → synthesize
- Sensitivity = (Gap magnitude) × (Chain position weight) × (Assumption vulnerability)
- Chain position weight: on critical chain = 2.0, feeding chain = 1.0, off-chain = 0.5
- Rank all constraints by sensitivity score
Decision Criteria
- When to use: After multiple constraints have been identified and need prioritization
- When to skip: If only 1-2 constraints exist, ranking is trivial
- Threshold: Constraints with sensitivity score >2× the median are "binding"
- Output: Ordered list with scores, used by parent strategy to focus effort
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| assumption-challenging | Challenge each assumption's validity — shared cross-repo SOP |
| critical-chain-identification | Identify the critical chain — longest path considering resource contention |
| resource-quantification | Quantify resource demand vs supply vs gap for each resource category |