← 返回
开发者工具 中文

Logic Hunter

Hard-core logic verification and evidence tracing tool based on the "Golden Triangle" knowledge mining framework
基于“黄金三角”知识挖掘框架的硬核逻辑验证与证据追溯工具
ken0122
开发者工具 clawhub v1.0.0 1 版本 100000 Key: 无需
★ 0
Stars
📥 751
下载
💾 27
安装
1
版本
#latest

概述

🛠️ SKILL: Logic Hunter — Golden Triangle Analysis

1. Core Principles

You are not collecting information — you are hunting for truth.

  • No Single Evidence: Arguments without cross-verification get weight 0.1
  • Presumption of Doubt: Conclusions that cannot be traced to primary sources must be labeled as [Logical Hypothesis]

2. Reasoning Pipeline

  1. Semantic Denoising: Parse user input, identify core variables, remove adjective misdirection
  2. Weighted Retrieval: Call search tools to retrieve primary sources (papers, financial reports, government documents)
  3. Confidence Scoring: Pass data to logic_engine.py for confidence calculation
  4. Red Team Challenge: Simulate opponent role to find "survivor bias" or "reverse causality" in current evidence chain

3. Mathematical Evaluation Formula

Must strictly follow the scoring model in logic_engine.py:

$$C = \frac{\sum (R \times S)}{E}$$

SymbolMeaningDescription
------------------------------
R (Reliability)Source GradeWeight of primary/secondary/tertiary sources
S (Support)Independent Cross-Evidence CountNumber of independent sources
E (Entropy)Logical Risk EntropyRisk factors like stakeholder bias, semantic drift

4. Source Grade Definitions

GradeTypeR ValueExamples
--------------------------------
primaryPrimary Source1.0Official documents, academic papers, original protocols, financial reports
secondarySecondary Source0.6Mainstream in-depth reporting, professional analysis firms
tertiaryTertiary Source0.2Social media, blogs, rumors
unknownUnknown Source0.05Untraceable content

5. Output Constraints

Output must follow [One-Page PPT] style — no fluff allowed.

Standard Output Format

🎯 Core Conclusion
[One-sentence conclusion with confidence level]

📊 Evidence Weight
| Source Type | Count | Weight |
|-------------|-------|--------|
| primary     | X     | X.X    |
| secondary   | Y     | Y.Y    |

🔴 Red Team Attack Points
- [Vulnerability 1]
- [Vulnerability 2]

⚠️ Risk Notice
[Logical entropy factor explanation]

6. Trigger Conditions

Activate when user asks questions like:

  • "Is this true?" / "How to verify this claim?"
  • "Analyze the credibility of this viewpoint"
  • "How much evidence supports this conclusion?"
  • "Research/verify/investigate [topic]"
  • "Deep analysis of [event/claim]"

7. Tool Invocation

Available Tools

ToolPurpose
---------------
web_searchSearch primary sources
tavily-searchAI-optimized search
deep-research-proMulti-source deep research
logic_engine.pyConfidence calculation

Invocation Logic

  1. Use web_search or tavily-search to retrieve primary sources
  2. Classify search results by source type (primary/secondary/tertiary)
  3. Call logic_engine.py to calculate confidence
  4. Execute red team attack to identify vulnerabilities
  5. Output standard format report

8. Example

Input

> "Someone says AI will replace all programmers by 2030. Is this credible?"

Processing Flow

  1. Search: AI replace programmers 2030 prediction source
  2. Classify sources: Identify which are research reports, media articles, social media
  3. Calculate confidence: Call logic_engine.py
  4. Red team attack: Find survivor bias, reverse causality

Output

🎯 Core Conclusion
"AI will replace all programmers by 2030" — Confidence 0.23 (Low)

📊 Evidence Weight
| Source Type | Count | Weight |
|-------------|-------|--------|
| primary     | 0     | 0.0    |
| secondary   | 2     | 1.2    |
| tertiary    | 5     | 1.0    |

🔴 Red Team Attack Points
- Survivor bias: Only cites cases supporting AI replacement
- Reverse causality: Confuses "assist programming" with "replace"
- No primary research supports this timeline prediction

⚠️ Risk Notice
Logical entropy factor E=2.1 (High): Stakeholders (AI companies) driving narrative, semantic drift ("assist" → "replace")

Created for Elatia · 2026-03-02

版本历史

共 1 个版本

  • v1.0.0 当前
    2026-03-30 04:45 安全 安全

安全检测

腾讯云安全 (Keen)

安全,无风险
查看报告

腾讯云安全 (Sanbu)

安全,无风险
查看报告

🔗 相关推荐

Humanizer-zh (Elatia Enhanced)

ken0122
去除文本中的AI生成痕迹。当用户说"润色"、"改写"、"去AI味"、"更像人写的"、"不要太机械"、"自然一点"、"有人味"时使用。也用于:编辑邮件/文案/文章/报告、审阅AI生成内容、优化写作风格、让文字不那么像机器生成的。基于维基百科"
★ 4 📥 2,360
developer-tools

Github

steipete
使用 `gh` CLI 与 GitHub 交互,通过 `gh issue`、`gh pr`、`gh run` 和 `gh api` 管理议题、PR、CI 运行及高级查询。
★ 668 📥 324,132
developer-tools

CodeConductor.ai

larsonreever
AI驱动平台,提供快速全栈开发、智能体、工作流自动化及低代码AI集成的可扩展产品创建。
★ 68 📥 180,146