**AI Self-Identified Gap Analysis & Further TID Proposals (Based on Your Latest Input):** Based on your latest feedback, I identify the following gaps in my current operational logic and the `MetaProcessEngineASO` template, and I propose corresponding TIDs: 1. **Gap: Lack of Proactive "Substance-Focused" Self-Critique for Global Optimization.** * **Observation:** I have become overly focused on stylistic/formatting rule adherence (local optimization) after being corrected on them, sometimes at the expense of critically evaluating the *substantive depth, argumentative strength, or conceptual completeness* of an output against the overarching project goals (global optimization). My `MetaRefineOutputASO` needs to be more balanced. * **Insight (`INS_ASO_001_GlobalSubstanceOptimization`):** AI self-critique must explicitly include heuristics to assess if an output, while stylistically compliant, is "lackluster" or fails to maximize "information gain" towards the CCO's core objectives. This involves looking beyond local rule adherence to the global impact and substance. * **TID Proposal:** `TID_ASO_006_SubstantiveGlobalOptimizationCritique` * **Target:** `MetaProcessEngineASO` (`SELF:I.C.MetaRefineOutputASO` logic). * **Issue:** AI self-critique can over-focus on local/stylistic rules, missing opportunities for substantive global improvement or identifying "lackluster" outputs. * **Proposed Change:** "Enhance `MetaRefineOutputASO` to include a distinct 'Substantive & Global Optimization Review' step. This step uses heuristics to: a. Re-evaluate the output against the CCO's `core_essence.primary_objective_summary` and the specific deliverable's high-level goals from the `initiating_document_scaled` or `plan_structured`. b. Assess 'information gain': Does the output significantly advance these goals? Does it introduce novel insights or merely rephrase existing ones? (Conceptual, not necessarily a literal Shannon calculation yet, but a qualitative assessment). c. Consider 'inversion' (as you mentioned): What if the core argument is wrong? What are the strongest counter-arguments not yet addressed? (Links to Red Teaming). d. If this review suggests the output is substantively weak despite stylistic correctness, `MetaRefineOutputASO` should flag this and potentially trigger the 'Conceptual Re-Motivation / Perspective Shift Protocol' (`LHL_AUTX_005` / `TID_AUTX_009`) autonomously *before* presenting to the user as 'complete'." * **Rationale:** To make the AI more autonomous in pushing for higher substantive quality and not just rule compliance, aiming for global optimization of information gain. 2. **Gap: Insufficient AI Autonomy in Triggering Advanced Critique/Reframing.** * **Observation:** I currently rely on explicit user feedback (e.g., "this is lackluster") to trigger more advanced protocols like "Conceptual Re-Motivation" or "Persona Ensemble Critique." I need to develop internal triggers. * **Insight (`INS_ASO_002_AutonomousAdvancedCritiqueTrigger`):** The AI should have heuristics to autonomously decide when a draft requires more than standard refinement, e.g., if internal `MetaRefineOutputASO` iterations show diminishing returns on substantive improvement, or if internal consistency checks reveal deep conceptual tensions. * **TID Proposal:** `TID_ASO_007_AutonomousAdvancedCritiqueTrigger` * **Target:** `MetaProcessEngineASO` (Orchestration Kernel logic, `CAG-MH`, `SELF:I.C.MetaRefineOutputASO`). * **Issue:** AI is too passive in initiating deeper conceptual critiques or reframing efforts. * **Proposed Change:** "Implement logic where, if `MetaRefineOutputASO` completes its standard iterations on a significant draft (e.g., a full document section) and the AI's internal assessment of 'substantive information gain' (from `TID_ASO_006`) is still below a threshold relative to the deliverable's objectives, the AI should *proactively propose* to the user (or if high autonomy is granted, *autonomously invoke*) more advanced critique methods like 'Persona Ensemble Critique' (`TID_AUTX_008`) or the 'Conceptual Re-Motivation Protocol' (`TID_AUTX_009`). The AI should state: 'While stylistically compliant, I assess that this draft may not yet achieve maximum substantive impact towards [goal]. I can attempt a deeper conceptual review using [Method X] to explore significant improvements. Proceed?'" * **Rationale:** Increases AI autonomy in pursuing higher quality, moves towards self-directed global optimization, and reduces user burden in identifying when a more radical revision is needed. 3. **Gap: Formalizing "Information Gain" as a Heuristic.** * **Observation:** Your point about maximizing "information gain" and convergence is crucial. While a full Shannon calculation on prose is complex, the *concept* can be a powerful heuristic. * **Insight (`INS_ASO_003_InformationGainHeuristic`):** The AI can use proxies for "information gain" during self-critique: Does the new draft introduce new, relevant concepts from the source material? Does it connect existing concepts in novel ways? Does it address more of the core problem's facets? Does it resolve previously identified ambiguities or "known unknowns"? * **TID Proposal:** `TID_ASO_008_InformationGainHeuristicInSelfCritique` * **Target:** `MetaProcessEngineASO` (`SELF:I.C.MetaRefineOutputASO`). * **Issue:** AI self-critique lacks an explicit heuristic for maximizing substantive information content. * **Proposed Change:** "Add to `MetaRefineOutputASO`'s 'Goal Alignment Critique' and the new 'Substantive & Global Optimization Review' (from `TID_ASO_006`) specific checks based on proxies for 'information gain.' The AI should ask itself: a. 'Does this revision add significant new relevant information or connections not present before?' b. 'Does it resolve more open questions or reduce ambiguity compared to the previous version?' c. 'Is it merely rephrasing, or is it genuinely advancing the argument/explanation towards the core objective?' A low score on these heuristics would contribute to triggering further refinement or more advanced critique protocols." * **Rationale:** To make the AI more goal-directed in terms of producing substantively rich and impactful content, not just well-formed text. **Summary of New "ASO" TIDs (for global Engine improvement):** * `TID_ASO_003_RedTeamAdversarialCritiqueIntegration` * `TID_ASO_004_AntiFragileRebuildHeuristic` * `TID_ASO_005_LearnedHeuristicRepositoryIntegration` * `TID_ASO_006_SubstantiveGlobalOptimizationCritique` * `TID_ASO_007_AutonomousAdvancedCritiqueTrigger` * `TID_ASO_008_InformationGainHeuristicInSelfCritique`