# Method — The Civic Analyst LLM Loop ## Purpose of the Loop The Civic Analyst employs AI not as an oracle, but as a **discipline-enforcing partner**. The loop ensures that every claim is tested, contextualized, and refined before publication. The process is designed to: * Prevent narrative drift. * Expose logical gaps and overreach. * Preserve the full reasoning chain for public audit. --- ## The Loop: Step by Step **Claim → LLM → Context → LLM → Civic Consequence** 1. **Claim** * State the proposition to test. * Example: “Religious absolutism crowds out institutional capacity.” 2. **LLM (First Pass)** * Subject the draft claim to critique. * Identify logical gaps, overstatements, and ambiguities. 3. **Context** * Reconstruct the full institutional, historical, and comparative frame. * Gather laws, codes, regulations, and empirical evidence. * Place the claim within its civic setting. 4. **LLM (Second Pass)** * Submit the contextualized draft for refinement. * Ensure coherence, clarity, and alignment with Civic Analyst standards. 5. **Civic Consequence** * State the implications for governance, law, and public life. * Publish findings with the **full conversation preserved**. --- ## Method of Transparency * Every loop is a conversation. * Drafts, critiques, revisions, and context-building must be preserved. * The **conversation itself** becomes part of the civic record, published in `11_Appendix_Conversation.md`. --- ## Standards for the Loop * **No skipping steps**: Each loop must pass through both LLM critiques and explicit context-building. * **No silent edits**: Every revision must be traceable in the transcript. * **No shortcuts**: The Analyst cannot collapse context into narrative; transparency is mandatory. --- ## Closing Declaration This method defines the standard loop for Civic Analyst reports. It will not be revised. Any future improvement must come from new analyses published by other Civic Analysts. ---