9148c358d0
Topic_Agent/Topic_Blog/Topics/Topics_Biz/Topics_Meeting/Topics_Rag의 마크다운 지식 문서를 Topic_General/Topic_Programming/Topic_Graphic/Topic_Business 4개 카테고리로 재분류. - 중복 제거: frontmatter의 status:duplicate/merged + duplicate_of/redirect_to 필드로 자기 자신을 중복으로 선언한 리다이렉트 stub 1032개 제거, 완전 동일 내용 파일 472개 제거, 동일 파일명·다른 내용 충돌 시 더 큰(완전한) 버전만 유지(162개 제거) — 총 1639개 중복 제거. - 분류: 폴더 단위로 명확한 항목(AI_and_ML/Coding/Architecture 등 → Programming, Comfyui/Visual_Effects → Graphic, Topics_Biz/Topics_Meeting/사업 등 → Business, Poetic_Blog_Writing/창의성/Game_Design 등 → General)은 폴더 우선순위로, 나머지 혼재 폴더(Topic_Agent/Topic_Blog/Topics 루트/Thinking & Reasoning/Other/UI_UX_Assets)는 title/tags 키워드 스코어링으로 파일 단위 분류(불명확한 경우 General로 폴백). 원본 폴더명은 "From_*" 서브폴더로 보존해 추적 가능성 유지. - 최종 배치: Programming 2784 / General 1608 / Graphic 285 / Business 249 = 4926개 문서. - 에이전트 운영 상태(.astra/.agent/.obsidian/sessions/memory/_company/docs/lessons/_shared/src)는 지식 콘텐츠가 아니므로 재분류 대상에서 제외하고 원위치 유지. - Topics/Topic_email(상위 보호 폴더 Topic_email과 파일명 100% 중복) 삭제 — 보호 폴더 자체는 미변경. - 완전히 비게 된 Topic_Agent/Topic_Blog/Topics_Biz/Topics_Rag 폴더 제거.
5.5 KiB
5.5 KiB
id, title, category, status, canonical_id, aliases, duplicate_of, source_trust_level, confidence_score, verification_status, tags, raw_sources, last_reinforced, github_commit, tech_stack
| id | title | category | status | canonical_id | aliases | duplicate_of | source_trust_level | confidence_score | verification_status | tags | raw_sources | last_reinforced | github_commit | tech_stack | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| wiki-2026-0508-outside-thinking | Outside Thinking | 10_Wiki/Topics | verified | self |
|
none | A | 0.9 | applied |
|
2026-05-10 | pending |
|
Outside Thinking
매 한 줄
"매 your project is not special — base rates always win.". 매 Kahneman & Tversky 의 "outside view" — 매 현재 상황의 unique details 무시 → 매 reference class 의 base rate 로 forecast. 매 2026 AI eval/forecasting community (Tetlock, Manifold, Metaculus) 의 핵심 도구.
매 핵심
매 inside vs outside
- Inside view: 매 plan 의 details 로부터 outcome 추정 ("우리는 매 6주 만에 끝낼 수 있어").
- Outside view: 매 similar past projects 의 base rate ("comparable projects 평균 18주, σ=8주").
- Result: 매 outside view 가 거의 항상 더 정확 — 매 planning fallacy 회피.
매 reference class forecasting (Flyvbjerg)
- 매 step 1: 매 identify reference class (similar projects).
- 매 step 2: 매 collect distribution of outcomes (cost, time, success rate).
- 매 step 3: 매 your project = sample from that distribution.
- 매 step 4: 매 adjust only with strong evidence.
매 응용
- Software estimation: 매 "this PR will take 1 day" → 매 historical median = 4 days.
- Startup success: 매 "we'll be the exception" → 매 base rate ~10% survive 5y.
- AI capability forecast: 매 "LLM will solve X by 2027" → 매 reference class of past predictions.
💻 패턴
Pattern 1: Reference class forecaster
import numpy as np
def outside_forecast(reference_class_outcomes: list[float],
inside_estimate: float,
trust_in_inside: float = 0.2):
"""매 Bayesian blend — 매 prior is base rate."""
base_rate_mean = np.mean(reference_class_outcomes)
base_rate_std = np.std(reference_class_outcomes)
# 매 weighted blend
blended = (1 - trust_in_inside) * base_rate_mean + trust_in_inside * inside_estimate
return {"forecast": blended, "p10": np.percentile(reference_class_outcomes, 10),
"p90": np.percentile(reference_class_outcomes, 90)}
Pattern 2: Estimation poker with history
def estimate(task, similar_tasks_db):
similar = find_similar(task, similar_tasks_db, k=10)
durations = [t.actual_duration for t in similar]
return {
"p50": np.median(durations),
"p90": np.percentile(durations, 90),
"warning": "Inside-view estimate is below p10" if task.guess < np.percentile(durations, 10) else None,
}
Pattern 3: Pre-mortem — outside view of failure modes
def pre_mortem(project, similar_failed_projects):
"""매 imagine project failed; 매 list reasons from history."""
failure_modes = []
for fp in similar_failed_projects:
failure_modes.extend(fp.post_mortem_causes)
return Counter(failure_modes).most_common(10)
Pattern 4: Prediction market calibration
# 매 force outside view via market — 매 your private estimate vs market price
def confidence_check(my_p, market_p):
if abs(my_p - market_p) > 0.20:
return "RED FLAG: large divergence from outside view"
return "OK"
Pattern 5: Survivorship bias correction
def correct_for_survivorship(success_stories, full_population):
survivor_rate = len(success_stories) / len(full_population)
return {
"naive_lesson": "Do what successes did",
"corrected": f"Only {survivor_rate:.0%} survive — failures often did same things",
}
Pattern 6: LLM as outside view oracle
PROMPT = """For the following plan, list:
1. The reference class (similar past projects)
2. Base rate of success
3. Typical failure modes
4. Why this project might/might-not be representative
"""
매 결정 기준
| 상황 | Approach |
|---|---|
| 매 estimating new project | Outside view first, inside view as adjustment |
| 매 confident in unique advantage | Outside view with small inside-view weight |
| 매 forecasting AI capabilities | Reference class of past predictions |
| 매 startup go/no-go | Compare to founder cohort base rates |
| 매 research timeline | Reference class of similar papers/benchmarks |
기본값: 매 outside view first, inside view as 매 small adjustment (≤20% weight).
🔗 Graph
🤖 LLM 활용
언제: 매 estimation, 매 forecasting, 매 strategic planning, 매 evaluating "we're different" claims. 언제 X: 매 truly novel domains where no reference class exists (rare — usually a class can be found).
❌ 안티패턴
- "Our project is unique": 매 99% of the time, not unique enough to escape base rates.
- Cherry-picked reference class: 매 selecting only successes — 매 survivorship bias.
- Ignoring distribution: 매 only using mean — 매 use p10/p90.
- No update mechanism: 매 collecting new data but not updating reference class.
🧪 검증 / 중복
- Verified (Kahneman 2011, Flyvbjerg 2006, Tetlock 2015).
- 신뢰도 A.
🕓 Changelog
| 날짜 | 변경 |
|---|---|
| 2026-05-08 | Phase 1 |
| 2026-05-10 | Manual cleanup — outside vs inside view, reference class forecasting |