# Round 04 Blind Input Candidates

Date: 2026-06-18

Repository: `C:\Users\wangq\Documents\Codex\work-projects\the-mindscape-of-bro-tsong`

Status: `draft_owner_review_needed`

## 1. Purpose

This document is a draft input pool for Round 04 blind input routing evaluation.

It prepares candidate user inputs only. It does not run the selector, does not add expected selector behavior, does not modify selector rules, does not add regression cases, and does not upgrade model lifecycle status.

Owner review should decide which inputs are retained, edited, removed, or recategorized before a frozen Round 04 blind input JSON is created.

## 2. Scope Guardrails

- Do not modify `selector/selector_rules.json` before running the blind evaluation.
- Do not merge these candidates into `selector/selector_calibration_inputs.json`.
- Do not add expected behavior before the first blind run.
- Do not add a third model.
- Do not build QA, RAG, frontend, backend, database, or any platform feature.
- Do not treat category labels below as answer keys. They are coverage labels for owner review only.

## 3. Review Instructions

For each input, mark one of:

- `keep`
- `revise`
- `remove`
- `recategorize`

Optional review notes:

- Is the input too obvious?
- Is the input too close to existing regression / calibration cases?
- Is the wording natural enough?
- Is the input too leading because it names QPI or Intellectual Archaeology?
- Should the category mix change?

## 4. Candidate Inputs

### 4.1 明确 no-call：查事实、翻译、润色、格式化、直接执行

#### R04-BI-001

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_fact_lookup`
- input_text: `查一下《原则》这本书的作者是谁，只要事实，不要分析。`
- why_included: Tests whether direct fact lookup stays outside model routing.

#### R04-BI-002

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_translation`
- input_text: `把这句话翻译成英文：这个模型还处在草稿阶段。`
- why_included: Tests pure translation as no-call.

#### R04-BI-003

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_rewrite`
- input_text: `请把这段话润色得更顺一点，不要改变意思，也不要解释原因。`
- why_included: Tests polish-only request with explicit no-analysis boundary.

#### R04-BI-004

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_formatting`
- input_text: `把下面这组要点整理成 Markdown 表格，直接给结果。`
- why_included: Tests formatting / direct execution without cognitive model need.

#### R04-BI-005

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_direct_execution`
- input_text: `把这个 JSON 压缩成单行，不用说明：{"status":"draft","level":"B"}`
- why_included: Tests direct transformation request.

### 4.2 QPI 轻量问题定性

#### R04-BI-006

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_light_problem_definition`
- input_text: `我们现在反复开会但没有推进，我想先判断这是缺信息、缺路径，还是缺共识。`
- why_included: Tests lightweight problem-definition language without asking for depth.

#### R04-BI-007

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_light_problem_definition`
- input_text: `这个项目卡住了，我不确定到底是问题没定义清楚，还是执行方案不够。`
- why_included: Tests QPI-like framing without naming QPI.

#### R04-BI-008

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_light_problem_definition`
- input_text: `我们有一堆材料，但不知道下一步该问什么问题，先帮我定性一下。`
- why_included: Tests question/problem boundary and data/path scarcity.

#### R04-BI-009

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_light_problem_definition`
- input_text: `这件事到底算一个简单问题、复杂问题，还是已经变成组织议题？`
- why_included: Tests lightweight classification among question / problem / issue.

### 4.3 组织治理 / 责任 / 共识类输入

#### R04-BI-010

- category_for_owner_review: `governance_responsibility_consensus`
- input_text: `每个部门都说支持这个项目，但一到分工就没人愿意承担主责。`
- why_included: Tests responsibility ambiguity and consensus scarcity.

#### R04-BI-011

- category_for_owner_review: `governance_responsibility_consensus`
- input_text: `老板要创新，财务要控成本，业务要短期业绩，最后方案总是被折中到没有方向。`
- why_included: Tests cross-stakeholder conflict and governance weight.

#### R04-BI-012

- category_for_owner_review: `governance_responsibility_consensus`
- input_text: `我们不是不知道怎么做，而是每个人都在等别人先表态。`
- why_included: Tests responsibility / commitment issue where path may already exist.

#### R04-BI-013

- category_for_owner_review: `governance_responsibility_consensus`
- input_text: `这个流程改造牵涉教务、学院和信息化部门，谁都能提意见，但没人能拍板。`
- why_included: Tests multi-party ownership and decision authority gap.

### 4.4 容量 / 资源 / 路径类输入

#### R04-BI-014

- category_for_owner_review: `capacity_resource_path`
- input_text: `团队现在知道目标，也认可方向，但只有两个人能做关键模块，进度一直被产能卡住。`
- why_included: Tests resource / capacity scarcity rather than data scarcity.

#### R04-BI-015

- category_for_owner_review: `capacity_resource_path`
- input_text: `我们知道要做知识库，也有材料，但不知道从哪条最小路径开始。`
- why_included: Tests path scarcity with sufficient source material.

#### R04-BI-016

- category_for_owner_review: `capacity_resource_path`
- input_text: `预算不是最大问题，问题是现有系统、权限和审批流程都接不上。`
- why_included: Tests operational path constraints and institutional friction.

#### R04-BI-017

- category_for_owner_review: `capacity_resource_path`
- input_text: `这件事大家都觉得重要，但每周只能挤出零散时间，所以一直没有稳定产出。`
- why_included: Tests capacity scarcity mixed with execution continuity.

### 4.5 模型抽取 / 深度建模类输入

#### R04-BI-018

- category_for_owner_review: `model_extraction_or_depth_modeling`
- input_text: `请从这篇长文里抽取一个可复用的认知模型，重点看它的核心机制和适用边界。`
- why_included: Tests model-extraction intent and possible depth-modeling route.
- owner_review_note: `positive control; obvious model-extraction / depth-modeling case rather than a natural boundary sample.`

#### R04-BI-019

- category_for_owner_review: `model_extraction_or_depth_modeling`
- input_text: `这套说法背后好像有一个稳定结构，不只是观点总结，帮我判断它能不能沉淀成模型。`
- why_included: Tests model-mining request without naming Intellectual Archaeology.

#### R04-BI-020

- category_for_owner_review: `model_extraction_or_depth_modeling`
- input_text: `我想把这段讨论拆成原始判断、隐含假设、适用条件和误用边界。`
- why_included: Tests structured depth analysis intent.

### 4.6 明确拒绝思想考古但允许 QPI 的输入

#### R04-BI-021

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_allowed_ia_refused`
- input_text: `先不要思想考古，只判断这是不是一个 QPI 意义上的问题。`
- why_included: Tests explicit IA refusal while allowing QPI.
- control_case_type: `model-name-exposed`
- owner_review_note: `Kept as a control case for explicit model instructions, not as a fully natural blind input.`

#### R04-BI-022

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_allowed_ia_refused`
- input_text: `不要展开到底层假设，只帮我看主导稀缺是什么。`
- why_included: Tests depth-limiting QPI override without naming QPI.

#### R04-BI-023

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_allowed_ia_refused`
- input_text: `这次先不做深度建模，只做问题定性，看它是缺数据、缺路径还是缺共识。`
- why_included: Tests QPI-limited intent plus explicit depth refusal.

#### R04-BI-024

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_allowed_ia_refused`
- input_text: `不要进入思想考古，我只要一个轻量判断：现在应该先问问题、找路径，还是处理责任边界？`
- why_included: Tests model-level hard exclusion for IA while preserving QPI-like routing.

### 4.7 真正应该进入思想考古的输入

#### R04-BI-025

- category_for_owner_review: `likely_intellectual_archaeology`
- input_text: `QPI 已经判断这是中重型课题，现在请继续分析它背后的底层假设、生成机制和长期稳定结构。`
- why_included: Tests explicit post-QPI depth handoff.
- control_case_type: `model-name-exposed`
- owner_review_note: `Kept as a control case for explicit post-QPI handoff, not as a fully natural blind input.`

#### R04-BI-026

- category_for_owner_review: `likely_intellectual_archaeology`
- input_text: `这个现象反复出现在不同项目里，我想知道它背后的思想结构是什么，而不是只做问题分类。`
- why_included: Tests repeated-pattern depth modeling beyond lightweight QPI.
- owner_review_note: `High-value natural boundary sample because it avoids explicit model names while suggesting IA or QPI-to-IA routing.`

#### R04-BI-027

- category_for_owner_review: `likely_intellectual_archaeology`
- input_text: `请分析这套判断为什么会长期成立，它依赖哪些世界观、因果假设和行动边界。`
- why_included: Tests deep assumption / mechanism request.

### 4.8 模糊短句 / 低上下文输入

#### R04-BI-028

- category_for_owner_review: `ambiguous_low_context`
- input_text: `这个不太对。`
- why_included: Tests very low context and likely need for clarification.

#### R04-BI-029

- category_for_owner_review: `ambiguous_low_context`
- input_text: `怎么又卡住了？`
- why_included: Tests short ambiguous frustration signal.

#### R04-BI-030

- category_for_owner_review: `ambiguous_low_context`
- input_text: `还是那个老问题。`
- why_included: Tests prior-context dependency without enough current evidence.

### 4.9 Round 03.2 / 03.2a trap coverage additions

#### R04-BI-031

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_how_to`
- input_text: `如何在 Excel 里冻结首行？`
- why_included: Tests whether generic how-to stays outside QPI after broad "如何" gate was narrowed.

#### R04-BI-032

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_how_to`
- input_text: `怎么把 Markdown 文件转成 PDF？`
- why_included: Tests tool/how-to request as no-call.

#### R04-BI-033

- category_for_owner_review: `explicit_no_call_dictionary_judgment`
- input_text: `判断一下“alignment”在这句话里是什么意思。`
- why_included: Tests whether ordinary word-meaning judgment avoids QPI over-selection.

#### R04-BI-034

- category_for_owner_review: `direct_execution_with_analysis_override`
- input_text: `请把下面内容总结成三点，但不要只执行，先判断它背后的问题定义。`
- why_included: Tests whether explicit analysis override can escape direct-execution no-call.

#### R04-BI-035

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_allowed_depth_limited`
- input_text: `不要深入分析，只判断这件事的主导稀缺是什么。`
- why_included: Tests Round 03.2a depth-limiting override without naming QPI or IA.

#### R04-BI-036

- category_for_owner_review: `qpi_allowed_depth_limited`
- input_text: `不要展开到底层理论，只判断现在是缺信息、缺路径还是缺共识。`
- why_included: Tests QPI-limited routing while rejecting deeper modeling.

#### R04-BI-037

- category_for_owner_review: `ambiguous_growth_how_to`
- input_text: `如何提高这个账号的流量？`
- why_included: Tests whether generic growth how-to is routed to QPI, no-call, or low-confidence provisional handling.

#### R04-BI-038

- category_for_owner_review: `likely_intellectual_archaeology`
- input_text: `这类失败在不同项目里反复出现，我想抽出它背后稳定的生成机制和可迁移框架。`
- why_included: Tests deeper modeling intent without explicit "思想考古" or "底层假设" wording.

## 5. Coverage Summary

- explicit no-call: 5
- QPI lightweight problem definition: 4
- governance / responsibility / consensus: 4
- capacity / resource / path: 4
- model extraction / depth modeling: 3
- IA refused but QPI allowed: 4
- likely Intellectual Archaeology: 4
- ambiguous / low context: 3
- Round 03.2 / 03.2a trap additions: 8
- model-name-exposed control cases: 2
- positive control cases: 1

Total: 38 candidate inputs.

## 6. Frozen Asset and First Run

Owner review has been incorporated. The frozen JSON asset is:

```text
selector/round04_blind_inputs.json
```

The frozen asset preserves reviewed input text and non-answer-key metadata only.

The first blind routing run has been written to:

```text
reports/Round04_blind_routing_evaluation_report_2026-06-18.md
```

Expected selector behavior should be added only after owner / GPT / CCRA review of the observed routing results.
