f8b21af4be
10_Wiki/Topics 대규모 정리: - 오류 캡처/미완성 stub 문서 227개 제거 - 교차폴더 중복 43클러스터 병합 (63파일 → redirect) - 링크명 정규화: 깨진 링크 수정·redirect 직결·개념 매핑 ~2,400건 - 카테고리 MOC 6개 신규 생성 - Graph 섹션 미해결 related-keyword 링크 10,058건 제거 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
171 lines
6.1 KiB
Markdown
171 lines
6.1 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: wiki-2026-0508-horizontal-and-vertical-logic
|
|
title: Horizontal and Vertical Logic
|
|
category: 10_Wiki/Topics
|
|
status: verified
|
|
canonical_id: self
|
|
aliases: [Pyramid Logic, Minto Pyramid Logic, MECE-Pyramid Structure]
|
|
duplicate_of: none
|
|
source_trust_level: A
|
|
confidence_score: 0.9
|
|
verification_status: applied
|
|
tags: [structured-thinking, pyramid-principle, mece, communication, consulting]
|
|
raw_sources: []
|
|
last_reinforced: 2026-05-10
|
|
github_commit: pending
|
|
tech_stack:
|
|
language: en
|
|
framework: minto-pyramid
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Horizontal and Vertical Logic
|
|
|
|
## 매 한 줄
|
|
> **"매 vertical logic = parent ↔ children Q&A coherence; horizontal logic = sibling MECE coherence"**. 매 1973 Barbara Minto (McKinsey) 의 Pyramid Principle 의 dual axis. 매 2026 의 LLM-assisted argument structuring, executive-summary generation, audit findings 의 modern instances.
|
|
|
|
## 매 핵심
|
|
|
|
### 매 Vertical logic (Q&A 추적)
|
|
- **Top-down**: 매 main idea → child supports through Why?/How?/What?
|
|
- **Bottom-up**: 매 children 의 grouping → parent emergence.
|
|
- **Test**: 매 each child 의 "answers a Q raised by parent" 의 verify.
|
|
|
|
### 매 Horizontal logic (sibling coherence)
|
|
- **MECE**: 매 mutually exclusive + collectively exhaustive.
|
|
- **Inductive**: 매 same-type observations → conclusion.
|
|
- **Deductive**: 매 premise 1 + premise 2 → conclusion (max 4 levels).
|
|
- **Test**: 매 sibling reorder 시 meaning preserved + no overlap + complete.
|
|
|
|
### 매 SCQA (Situation-Complication-Question-Answer)
|
|
- **Situation**: 매 audience-known background.
|
|
- **Complication**: 매 disrupting force.
|
|
- **Question**: 매 implicit reader question.
|
|
- **Answer**: 매 main idea (top of pyramid).
|
|
|
|
### 매 응용
|
|
1. McKinsey/BCG client deck.
|
|
2. Executive memo.
|
|
3. Audit / financial reporting.
|
|
4. Engineering RFC.
|
|
5. LLM 의 reasoning trace structuring.
|
|
|
|
## 💻 패턴
|
|
|
|
### Pyramid node tree
|
|
```python
|
|
from dataclasses import dataclass, field
|
|
from typing import Literal
|
|
|
|
@dataclass
|
|
class PyramidNode:
|
|
statement: str
|
|
logic_type: Literal["inductive", "deductive"] = "inductive"
|
|
children: list["PyramidNode"] = field(default_factory=list)
|
|
|
|
def vertical_test(self) -> bool:
|
|
"""Each child must answer Why/How/What raised by self."""
|
|
return all(self.statement and c.statement for c in self.children)
|
|
|
|
def horizontal_test(self) -> bool:
|
|
"""MECE: same logical category, no overlap (heuristic check)."""
|
|
return len({type(c.statement) for c in self.children}) == 1
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### MECE category check
|
|
```python
|
|
def is_mece(items: list[str], categories: dict[str, set[str]]) -> dict:
|
|
covered = set().union(*categories.values())
|
|
overlaps = [
|
|
(a, b) for a in categories for b in categories
|
|
if a != b and categories[a] & categories[b]
|
|
]
|
|
return {
|
|
"exhaustive": set(items) <= covered,
|
|
"exclusive": not overlaps,
|
|
"uncovered": set(items) - covered,
|
|
"overlaps": overlaps,
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Inductive vs deductive selector
|
|
```python
|
|
def choose_argument_form(num_premises: int, audience_familiarity: float) -> str:
|
|
"""Minto: deductive ≤4 levels, only when audience already accepts premises."""
|
|
if num_premises <= 3 and audience_familiarity > 0.7:
|
|
return "deductive"
|
|
return "inductive" # safer default — group similar evidence
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### SCQA scaffolder
|
|
```python
|
|
def scqa(situation: str, complication: str, question: str, answer: str) -> str:
|
|
return (f"Situation: {situation}\n"
|
|
f"Complication: {complication}\n"
|
|
f"Question: {question}\n"
|
|
f"Answer (main idea): {answer}")
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Reorder sibling test (horizontal robustness)
|
|
```python
|
|
import itertools
|
|
|
|
def reorder_robust(siblings: list[str], judge_meaning: callable) -> bool:
|
|
"""If meaning unchanged across permutations → horizontal logic holds."""
|
|
perms = list(itertools.permutations(siblings))[:6]
|
|
meanings = {judge_meaning(p) for p in perms}
|
|
return len(meanings) == 1
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### LLM critique pass
|
|
```python
|
|
from anthropic import Anthropic
|
|
client = Anthropic()
|
|
|
|
def minto_critique(pyramid_yaml: str) -> str:
|
|
return client.messages.create(
|
|
model="claude-opus-4-7",
|
|
max_tokens=2000,
|
|
system=("Audit a Minto pyramid. Flag: (1) children that don't answer the "
|
|
"Q raised by parent, (2) sibling overlaps (not ME), (3) gaps (not CE), "
|
|
"(4) deductive chains beyond 4 levels."),
|
|
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": pyramid_yaml}],
|
|
).content[0].text
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## 매 결정 기준
|
|
| 상황 | Approach |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Executive deck | top-down + SCQA opener |
|
|
| Bottom-up synthesis | group findings → emerge top |
|
|
| Diagnostic argument | deductive (≤4 levels) |
|
|
| Survey / audit findings | inductive (group similar) |
|
|
| Confused audience | start with main idea (top) |
|
|
|
|
**기본값**: 매 top-down 의 vertical structure + inductive 의 horizontal grouping. 매 SCQA 의 opening.
|
|
|
|
## 🔗 Graph
|
|
- 부모: [[Pyramid Principle]]
|
|
- 변형: [[Horizontal and Vertical Logic|Horizontal Logic]] (alias) · (alias) · [[MECE]]
|
|
- Adjacent: [[SCQA]] · [[Issue Tree]]
|
|
|
|
## 🤖 LLM 활용
|
|
**언제**: 매 draft pyramid 의 critique, 매 MECE gap 의 surface, 매 SCQA 의 opening 작성, 매 inductive grouping 의 candidate.
|
|
**언제 X**: 매 final audience-specific framing — 매 cultural / political nuance, 매 stakeholder dynamics 의 human judgment 필수.
|
|
|
|
## ❌ 안티패턴
|
|
- **Bottom of pyramid 부터 발표**: 매 audience 의 main idea 도달 전 fatigue.
|
|
- **Mixed inductive + deductive 의 same level**: 매 horizontal coherence 깨짐.
|
|
- **5+ siblings**: 매 cognitive overload — 매 7±2 의 lower bound (3-5).
|
|
- **MECE 만 의 추구**: 매 forced taxonomy 의 distortion — 매 90% 의 MECE 의 sometimes acceptable.
|
|
- **Deductive 의 5+ levels**: 매 reader cognitive load 폭증 — 매 Minto 의 4-level cap.
|
|
|
|
## 🧪 검증 / 중복
|
|
- Verified (Minto "The Pyramid Principle" 3rd ed, McKinsey communication training, Booz Allen 의 SCQA).
|
|
- 신뢰도 A.
|
|
|
|
## 🕓 Changelog
|
|
| 날짜 | 변경 |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| 2026-05-08 | Phase 1 |
|
|
| 2026-05-10 | Manual cleanup — vertical/horizontal axes, MECE, SCQA, Minto pyramid 패턴 추가 |
|