Debate / adversarial
Several positions attack each other; disagreement surfaces the weak points.
Shape：Opposing agents, a third adjudicates
When to use it
High-stakes conclusions needing stress tests: investment decisions, architecture choices, risk assessment. The value is exposing weak arguments, not producing consensus.
When not to
Questions with objective answers. Debate does not make arithmetic right; it makes a wrong answer sound more convincing.
How it fails
- The most expensive pattern, with benefits that are hard to quantify.
- Converging on consensus rather than correctness. Several same-origin models reinforce one another's error.
- The assigned opposition does not try hard, because it knows it is playing a role.
Design notes
Give the opposition a different information surface from the proposer — different retrieval results, different assumptions — or it is one model talking to itself. The adjudicator must not also be a participant.
Origin
未核實到可引用的首次公開實作日期；不填。