math-skill 2.1.0 → 3.0.1

package/lenses/axiomatization.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# Axiomatization Lens
+
+> Build from minimal assumptions using rigorous logic — scrutinizing premises matters more than checking conclusions
+
+## What Perspective It Offers
+
+Axiomatization is not "proving things," but rather a stance of disciplined skepticism: every theoretical system rests on a set of implicit or explicit assumptions, and laying all of these assumptions bare — examining them one by one — is far more likely to reveal fundamental problems than inspecting the conclusions alone. If the premises are wrong, no conclusion, however elegant, can stand. This perspective turns the "taken for granted" into an object requiring verification.
+
+## What Problems It Is Suited to Diagnose
+
+- Whether the assumptions of a paper or theory are self-consistent, and whether undeclared implicit premises exist
+- Whether two ostensibly equivalent sets of premises are genuinely independent (i.e., whether redundant axioms are present)
+- Whether a formal system is decidable, and whether undecidable propositions exist within it
+- After axiomatizing an operator or structure and identifying its invariants, checking consistency and completeness
+
+## What Problems It Is Not Suited For
+
+- Purely factual queries — no theoretical framework requires examination
+- The user has already accepted the framework and only needs to apply it — the axioms are already chosen
+- Empirical questions — axiomatization cannot substitute for empirical evidence
+- Constructive contexts where the law of excluded middle or the axiom of choice should not be assumed by default
+
+## Which Knowledge Domains It Routes To
+
+- formal logic (no KB card yet, use critic): The choice among first-order, second-order, and constructive logic is the foundational decision in axiomatization
+- set theory (no KB card yet, use critic): ZFC/ZF as the background axiomatic system and the host for relative consistency proofs
+- model theory (no KB card yet, use critic): Model existence proves consistency; categoricity determines structural uniqueness
+
+## What AI Designs It May Inspire
+
+- **Premise Auditing Module**: Automatically extracts explicit and implicit assumptions from papers and annotates their logical hierarchy
+- **Axiom Perturbation Engine**: Given a change to one axiom, derives how the resulting theoretical system shifts
+- **Consistency Guardian**: Detects in real time whether the axiom set generates contradictions during reasoning
+
+## Reasoning Protocol
+
+1. **Lay Out Premises**: List all explicit axioms, implicit assumptions, and background framework assumptions
+2. **Specify the Language**: Declare the formal language (first-order, second-order, or constructive) and state the rationale for the choice
+3. **Consistency Check**: Construct a model or carry out a relative consistency proof to confirm the axiom set is non-contradictory
+4. **Independence Check**: For each axiom, attempt to construct a model in which it fails while all others hold
+5. **Completeness Assessment**: Determine whether the axiom set suffices to derive all significant results in the target domain, and annotate decidability
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- Every axiom has an explicit verdict on consistency, independence, and completeness (none left unresolved)
+- Implicit assumptions have been made explicit
+- The consequences of axiom modifications have been analyzed
+- An overall evaluative conclusion about the theoretical system has been provided

package/lenses/axiomatization.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# 公理化透镜
+
+> 从最少假设出发，用严格逻辑构建——审查前提比检查结论更重要
+
+## 它是什么视角
+
+公理化不是"证明东西"，而是一种怀疑的眼光：任何理论体系都建立在一组隐含或显式的假设之上，把这些假设全部摊开、逐一审查，比直接看结论更能发现根本性问题。前提错了，结论再精巧也站不住脚。这种视角把"理所当然"变成需要检验的对象。
+
+## 适合诊断什么问题
+
+- 论文/理论的假设是否自洽，是否存在未声明的隐式前提
+- 两组看似等价的前提是否真正独立（有无冗余公理）
+- 形式系统是否可判定，是否存在不可判定命题
+- 为算子/结构定公理与不变量后，检查相容性与完备性
+
+## 不适合什么问题
+
+- 纯粹的事实查询——没有理论体系需要审查
+- 用户已接受框架、只需应用——公理已选定
+- 经验性问题——公理化不能替代实证
+- 构造性语境下不应默认排中律或选择公理
+
+## 会路由到哪些知识域
+
+- 形式逻辑（暂无知识卡，由 critic 审查）：一阶/二阶/构造性逻辑的选择是公理化的基础决定
+- 集合论（暂无知识卡，由 critic 审查）：ZFC/ZF 作为背景公理系统，相对一致性证明的宿主
+- 模型论（暂无知识卡，由 critic 审查）：模型存在性证明相容性，范畴性判定结构唯一性
+
+## 可能产生哪些 AI 设计
+
+- **前提审计模块**：自动提取论文中显式/隐式假设，标注逻辑层次
+- **公理变更推演器**：改变某条公理后，推演理论体系如何变化
+- **一致性守卫**：在推理过程中实时检测公理集合是否产生矛盾
+
+## 推理协议
+
+1. **摊开前提**：列出所有显式公理、隐式假设、背景框架假设
+2. **规定语言**：明确形式语言（一阶/二阶/构造性），标注选择理由
+3. **相容性检验**：构造模型或做相对一致性证明，确认公理集不矛盾
+4. **独立性检验**：对每条公理，尝试构造使其不成立但其余成立的模型
+5. **完备性评估**：判断公理集是否足以推导目标领域所有重要结论，标注可判定性
+
+## 验收标准
+
+- 每条公理都有明确的相容性/独立性/完备性判定（不可悬置）
+- 隐式假设已被显式化
+- 公理变更的后果已分析
+- 给出了对该理论体系的整体评价结论

package/lenses/categorical.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# Categorification Lens
+
+> Strip away incidental details to reveal essential structure — problems across different domains often share the same abstract skeleton
+
+## What Perspective It Offers
+
+Categorification (formerly "Abstraction") is a way of "recognizing isomorphisms across domains": when confronted with a complex problem, first strip away surface details and ask, "What does its skeleton look like? Have I seen this skeleton in another domain before?" Essential features — those whose alteration would fundamentally change the nature of the problem — must be preserved; inessential features may be discarded. The category-theoretic viewpoint pays particular attention to the behavior of morphisms between objects rather than to the internal structure of the objects themselves.
+
+## What Problems It Is Suited to Diagnose
+
+- Facing a complex problem with no clear entry point — extract the core structure first
+- Two seemingly different problems share similarities — find a common abstract framework
+- A need to generalize concrete observations into general principles
+- Identifying transferable structural patterns for algorithm or operator design (group actions, functors, natural transformations)
+
+## What Problems It Is Not Suited For
+
+- Every detail is critical (e.g., debugging a specific bug) — abstraction discards crucial information
+- A concrete numerical answer is required — categorification does not provide specific computations
+- The problem is already in its simplest form — no further abstraction is needed
+
+## Which Knowledge Domains It Routes To
+
+- `lie-theory/equivariance`: Objects, morphisms, functors, natural transformations, and the Yoneda lemma — the core language for cross-domain transfer
+- `lie-theory/representation`: Groups, rings, fields, modules, and lattices — axiom-matching to identify algebraic structure
+- **topology**: Open sets, continuity, and connectedness — when the problem involves spatial structure and continuous deformation
+
+## What AI Designs It May Inspire
+
+- **Structure Recognizer**: Extracts objects and morphisms from a problem description and matches them to known categories
+- **Cross-Domain Analogy Engine**: Uses functors to transfer solution strategies from one domain to another
+- **Abstraction-Level Manager**: Determines whether the current stage involves extraction, generalization, or structuring, and decides whether to ascend to a higher level
+
+## Reasoning Protocol
+
+1. **Precisely Describe the Concrete**: Use mathematical language to describe all elements of the problem — objects, relations, constraints, and objectives
+2. **Distinguish Essential from Inessential**: Examine each feature one by one; determine whether altering it changes the core structure
+3. **Select a Matching Perspective**: Choose the best-matching framework from category theory, algebra, topology, or analysis, and execute its operations
+4. **Solve at the Abstract Level**: Use universal constructions (products, coproducts, limits) or the Yoneda perspective to solve the problem abstractly
+5. **Concretize Back to the Original Problem**: Translate the abstract solution precisely back into the mathematical language of the original problem, verifying that no information is lost
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- Essential and inessential features have been clearly distinguished and annotated
+- A matching abstract perspective has been selected with stated rationale
+- The abstract solution has been concretized back to the original problem
+- The round-trip process has been verified to preserve all critical information intact
+- The current level — extraction, generalization, or structuring — has been annotated

package/lenses/categorical.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# 范畴化透镜
+
+> 忽略偶然细节，揭示必然结构——不同领域的问题往往共享相同的抽象骨架
+
+## 它是什么视角
+
+范畴化（原"抽象化"）是一种"跨域识别同构"的眼光：面对复杂问题时，先剥离表面细节，追问"它的骨架长什么样？这个骨架在别的领域见过吗？"本质特征——改变后问题性质根本变化的——必须保留；非本质特征可以丢弃。范畴论视角尤其关注对象间的态射行为，而非对象内部构造。
+
+## 适合诊断什么问题
+
+- 面对复杂问题不知从何入手——先提取核心结构
+- 两个看似不同的问题有相似之处——寻找共同抽象框架
+- 需要将具体经验推广为一般规律
+- 为算法/算子设计寻找可迁移的结构模式（群作用、函子、自然变换）
+
+## 不适合什么问题
+
+- 每个细节都至关重要（如调试具体 bug）——抽象会丢失关键信息
+- 需要具体数值答案——范畴化不提供具体计算
+- 问题本身已是最简形式——无需进一步抽象
+
+## 会路由到哪些知识域
+
+- `lie-theory/equivariance`：对象/态射/函子/自然变换/Yoneda 引理——跨域迁移的核心语言
+- `lie-theory/representation`：群/环/域/模/格——识别运算结构的公理匹配
+- **topology**：开集/连续/连通——当问题涉及空间结构与连续变形时
+
+## 可能产生哪些 AI 设计
+
+- **结构识别器**：从问题描述中提取对象与态射，匹配已知范畴
+- **跨域类比引擎**：利用函子将一领域的解法迁移到另一领域
+- **抽象层级管理器**：判断当前处于提炼/推广/结构化哪一层，决定是否跃升
+
+## 推理协议
+
+1. **精确描述具体**：用数学语言描述问题的所有要素——对象、关系、约束、目标
+2. **区分本质与非本质**：逐项检查每个特征，改变后核心结构是否改变
+3. **选择视角匹配**：从范畴论/代数/拓扑/分析中选最匹配的，执行其操作
+4. **抽象层求解**：利用通用构造（积/余积/极限）或 Yoneda 视角在抽象层求解
+5. **具体化回原问题**：将抽象解精确翻译回原问题的数学语言，验证信息无丢失
+
+## 验收标准
+
+- 本质特征与非本质特征已明确区分并标注
+- 选择了匹配的抽象视角并说明理由
+- 抽象解已具体化回原问题
+- 验证了往返过程中关键信息完整保留
+- 标注了当前处于提炼/推广/结构化的哪一层

package/lenses/causal.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+# Causal Lens
+
+> Correlation does not imply causation — but causation can be clarified. The crucial distinction: "how Y behaves when X is observed" is not the same as "what would happen if X were done."
+
+## What Perspective It Offers
+
+This is an "interventionist's" perspective — unsatisfied with observed associations, it asks "if I actively change X, what happens to Y?" Pearl's causal hierarchy divides reasoning into three tiers: association (seeing), intervention (doing), and counterfactuals (imagining), each requiring stronger modeling assumptions. The core of causal inference is not "discovering" causation from data, but encoding assumptions in an explicit causal model (DAG) and then using the do-calculus to reduce interventional effects to observable quantities.
+
+## What Problems It Is Suited to Diagnose
+
+- Distinguishing genuine causal effects from spurious associations in observational data
+- Evaluating the effect of interventions, policies, or treatments ("what would happen if X were done")
+- Counterfactual reasoning ("what would have happened if A had not been done")
+- Modeling the data-generating process for model interpretability or out-of-distribution generalization
+
+## What Problems It Is Not Suited For
+
+- Pure prediction tasks with no causal question — only P(y|x) is needed; association suffices, and causation is superfluous
+- Problems where no causal assumptions can be encoded — if a plausible DAG cannot be drawn, no causal conclusions can be reached
+- Deterministic systems with no variation — causation is already fully described by the mechanism
+
+## Which Knowledge Domains It Routes To
+
+- Structural causal models (DAG / SCM / do-calculus): the formal framework for encoding causal assumptions and rendering interventional effects observable
+- Potential outcomes framework (Neyman-Rubin): definitions and estimation of ATE and individual treatment effects
+- Probability and statistics: conditional probability is the foundation of the association tier; causal effects require additional structural assumptions
+- Experimental design (RCT / IV / DD): validation tools for causal conclusions — randomization severs confounding paths
+
+## What AI Designs It May Inspire
+
+- DAG builder: encoding causal directions among variables, automatically identifying confounding paths and back-door / front-door conditions
+- Interventional effect calculator: back-door adjustment / do-calculus → P(y|do(x)), compared with P(y|x) to quantify confounding bias
+- Sensitivity analyzer: E-value / Rosenbaum Gamma to quantify the fragility of conclusions to unobserved confounding
+
+## Reasoning Protocol
+
+1. **Construct a causal DAG**: Identify all variables, draw causal arrows encoding direct-cause assumptions, and verify acyclicity
+2. **Identify confounders**: Find all common ancestors of X and Y; distinguish observed from unobserved confounders
+3. **Select an identification strategy**: Based on confounder observability, choose back-door / front-door / do-calculus to reduce P(y|do(x)) to observable quantities
+4. **Compute the interventional effect**: Apply the adjustment formula; compare with observational P(y|x) to measure confounding bias
+5. **Sensitivity analysis**: Quantify how strong an unobserved confounder would need to be to overturn the conclusion (E-value / Rosenbaum Gamma)
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- The DAG has been constructed with a justification for every arrow; acyclicity has been confirmed
+- Confounders have been listed, annotated as observed or unobserved
+- P(y|do(x)) has been computed and compared with P(y|x); confounding bias has been quantified
+- Counterfactual analysis (if required) states the necessary structural equations
+- Sensitivity analysis has been performed and the fragility of conclusions has been quantified

package/lenses/causal.md

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+# 因果透镜 / Causal Lens
+
+> 相关不等于因果——但因果可以理清。关键区别："看到 X 时 Y 如何"不等于"如果做了 X 会怎样"。
+
+## 它是什么视角
+
+这是一种"干预者"的视角——不满足于观察到的关联，追问"如果我主动改变 X，Y 会怎样？"。Pearl 因果层级将推理分为三层：关联（看到）、干预（做到）、反事实（想象），每层需要更强的建模假设。因果推断的核心不是从数据中"发现"因果，而是用显式因果模型（DAG）编码假设，再通过 do-演算将干预效应转化为可观测量。
+
+## 适合诊断什么问题
+
+- 需要从观察数据中区分真实因果效应与虚假关联
+- 需要评估干预/政策/处理的效果（"做了 X 会怎样"）
+- 需要反事实推理（"若当时没做 A 结果会怎样"）
+- 需要为模型可解释性或分布外泛化建模数据生成过程
+
+## 不适合什么问题
+
+- 纯预测任务且无因果问题——只需 P(y|x)，关联足够，因果多余
+- 无可编码的因果假设——画不出合理 DAG 就没有因果结论
+- 确定性系统且无变异——因果已被机制完全描述
+
+## 会路由到哪些知识域
+
+- 结构因果模型（DAG/SCM/do-演算）：编码因果假设并将干预效应可观测化的形式框架
+- 潜在结果框架（Neyman-Rubin）：ATE/个体效应的定义与估计
+- 概率与统计：条件概率是关联层的基础，因果效应需要额外的结构假设
+- 实验设计（RCT/IV/DD）：因果结论的验证工具——随机化切断混淆路径
+
+## 可能产生哪些 AI 设计
+
+- DAG 构建器：编码变量间因果方向，自动识别混淆路径与后门/前门条件
+- 干预效应计算器：后门调整 / do-演算 → P(y|do(x))，与 P(y|x) 对比量化混淆偏差
+- 敏感性分析器：E-value / Rosenbaum Gamma 量化结论对未观测混淆的脆弱性
+
+## 推理协议
+
+1. **构建因果 DAG**：明确所有变量，画因果箭头编码直接原因假设，检查无环性
+2. **识别混淆变量**：找 X、Y 的所有共同祖先，区分可观测与不可观测混淆
+3. **选择识别策略**：据混淆可观测性选后门/前门/do-演算，将 P(y|do(x)) 转化为可观测量
+4. **计算干预效应**：用调整公式计算，与观察性 P(y|x) 对比衡量混淆偏差
+5. **敏感性分析**：量化未观测混淆需要多强才能推翻结论（E-value/Rosenbaum Gamma）
+
+## 验收标准
+
+- DAG 已构建且每条箭头有假设依据，无环性已确认
+- 混淆变量已列出，可观测/不可观测已标注
+- P(y|do(x)) 已计算并与 P(y|x) 对比，混淆偏差已量化
+- 反事实分析（若需要）已说明所需结构方程
+- 敏感性分析已执行，结论的脆弱性已量化

package/lenses/duality.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+# Duality Lens
+
+> A hard problem is equivalent to an easy problem — the key is finding the right transform and its inverse
+
+## What Perspective It Offers
+
+Duality (formerly "Transform") is a way of "looking at a problem through a different representation": the same problem can admit multiple representations, and choosing a good transform can make a difficult problem simple. The essence of a transform is not to change the problem itself, but to change the vantage point from which it is viewed — differentiation becomes multiplication, convolution becomes pointwise multiplication, constrained optimization becomes a dual problem. But every transform must have an inverse: a transform without an inverse is evasion, not a solution.
+
+## What Problems It Is Suited to Diagnose
+
+- A problem is difficult to analyze or solve in its current form — a change of representation space is needed
+- Variables are coupled and need decoupling — transform to an independent coordinate system
+- Hidden structure needs to be revealed — periodicity invisible in the time domain becomes obvious in the frequency domain
+- Finding an equivalent but computationally friendlier representation
+
+## What Problems It Is Not Suited For
+
+- The problem is already simple enough — no transform is needed
+- The transform discards critical information and is not invertible — choose an information-preserving transform
+- Convergence conditions are not satisfied — forcing a transform produces meaningless results
+
+## Which Knowledge Domains It Routes To
+
+- `matrix-analysis/spectral-decomposition`: Fourier, Laplace, and Z-transforms — equivalent mappings from the time domain to the frequency domain
+- **matrix-analysis**: Spectral decomposition and low-rank approximation — transforms and simplifications in matrix space
+- **optimization/lagrangian-duality**: Legendre and Fenchel transforms — conversion from constrained optimization to dual problems
+
+## What AI Designs It May Inspire
+
+- **Difficulty Diagnoser**: Analyzes the type of difficulty in the current representation (computational complexity, unclear structure, variable coupling)
+- **Transform Selector**: Matches the most appropriate transform to the diagnosed difficulty type and checks convergence conditions
+- **Equivalence Verifier**: Confirms that no information is lost during the forward-transform and inverse-transform round trip
+
+## Reasoning Protocol
+
+1. **Diagnose the Difficulty**: Why is the current representation hard to work with — computational complexity, unclear structure, or variable coupling?
+2. **Select a Transform**: Choose a transform based on the difficulty type; specify the formula, domain mapping, and convergence conditions
+3. **Execute the Transform**: Map the problem into the new representation space, strictly following the formula
+4. **Verify the Region of Convergence**: Before applying transformed results, validate that convergence conditions are satisfied
+5. **Inverse-Transform Back to the Original Space**: Translate the solution back into the language of the original problem and verify equivalence
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- The difficulty of the current representation has been clearly diagnosed
+- The transform selection is justified with clear reasoning, and convergence conditions have been verified
+- The inverse transform has been executed and the solution has been returned to the original space
+- Equivalence has been verified: no information loss, correct region of convergence, and correct encoding of boundary conditions

package/lenses/duality.md

@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+# 对偶透镜
+
+> 复杂问题等价于简单问题——关键是找到合适的变换和它的逆
+
+## 它是什么视角
+
+对偶（原"变换"）是一种"换个表示看问题"的眼光：同一个问题可以有不同的表示方式，选择一个好的变换，可以让困难的问题变得简单。变换的精髓不是改变问题本身，而是改变看问题的视角——微分变乘法、卷积变乘法、约束优化变对偶问题。但变换必须有逆：没有逆变换的变换是逃避，不是解决。
+
+## 适合诊断什么问题
+
+- 问题在当前形式下难分析或求解——需要换表示空间
+- 变量耦合需要解耦——变换到独立坐标系
+- 隐藏结构需要揭示——时域看不出周期性，频域一目了然
+- 寻找等价但计算更友好的表示
+
+## 不适合什么问题
+
+- 问题已足够简单——不需要变换
+- 变换会丢失关键信息且不可逆——选保信息的变换
+- 收敛条件不满足——强行变换产生无意义结果
+
+## 会路由到哪些知识域
+
+- `matrix-analysis/spectral-decomposition`：傅里叶/拉普拉斯/Z 变换——时域到频域的等价映射
+- **matrix-analysis**：谱分解、低秩近似——矩阵空间的变换与简化
+- **optimization/lagrangian-duality**：Legendre/Fenchel 变换——约束优化到对偶问题的转换
+
+## 可能产生哪些 AI 设计
+
+- **困难诊断器**：分析当前表示的困难类型（运算复杂/结构不清晰/变量耦合）
+- **变换选择器**：根据困难类型匹配最合适的变换，检查收敛条件
+- **等价性验证器**：确认变换-逆变换往返过程中信息无丢失
+
+## 推理协议
+
+1. **诊断困难**：当前表示为什么难处理？运算复杂、结构不清晰、还是变量耦合
+2. **选择变换**：根据困难类型选择变换，明确公式、域映射、收敛条件
+3. **执行变换**：将问题变换到新表示空间，严格按公式执行
+4. **验证收敛域**：应用变换结果前必须验证收敛条件是否满足
+5. **逆变换回原空间**：将解翻译回原问题语言，验证等价性
+
+## 验收标准
+
+- 当前表示的困难已明确诊断
+- 变换选择有明确理由，收敛条件已验证
+- 逆变换已执行，解已回到原空间
+- 等价性已验证：信息无丢失、收敛域正确、边界条件正确编码

package/lenses/game.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+# Game Lens
+
+> Your optimal choice depends on others' choices — thinking must be not only deep but interactive.
+
+## What Perspective It Offers
+
+This is a "player's" perspective — in environments where multiple decision-makers mutually influence one another, each participant's optimal action depends on others' actions, and others' optimal actions in turn depend on yours. It demands recursive depth of reasoning: "I think that you think that I think..." The core is not optimizing one's own payoff, but finding a stable state from which no one is willing to unilaterally deviate — the Nash equilibrium.
+
+## What Problems It Is Suited to Diagnose
+
+- Multiple decision-makers whose strategies affect one another's payoffs
+- Designing incentive mechanisms that channel self-interested behavior toward desired social outcomes
+- Analyzing optimal strategies and equilibrium predictions in competitive or adversarial scenarios
+- Anticipating others' actions and adjusting one's own decisions accordingly
+
+## What Problems It Is Not Suited For
+
+- Single-agent decision problems with no interaction with others — the variational lens is more appropriate
+- Purely cooperative problems where all participants share identical objectives — strategic analysis is unnecessary
+- Deterministic problems where outcomes are uniquely determined by one's own actions — no others' responses are involved
+- Outcomes determined purely by luck, with no strategic choices available to any party
+
+## Which Knowledge Domains It Routes To
+
+- Game theory (Nash equilibrium / dominant strategies / mixed strategies): the core framework for analyzing strategic interaction
+- Mechanism design: redesigning the rules when equilibria are undesirable, making cooperation the self-interested choice
+- Optimization theory (minimax / linear programming): computational tools for zero-sum games and equilibrium computation
+- Probability theory (Bayesian games / expected payoffs): handling asymmetric information and type uncertainty
+
+## What AI Designs It May Inspire
+
+- Game-type classifier: zero-sum / non-zero-sum / sequential / cooperative → automatic matching of solution methods
+- Equilibrium solver and stability checker: Nash equilibrium + trembling-hand perfection + evolutionary stability
+- Mechanism design engine: when equilibria are undesirable, automatically generating payoff-structure / rule-modification recommendations
+
+## Reasoning Protocol
+
+1. **Identify players and strategy sets**: Who is making decisions? What can each choose? Omitting a key player is the most common error
+2. **Determine the game type**: Zero-sum / general-sum? Simultaneous / sequential? Complete / incomplete information? The type determines the method
+3. **Construct the payoff structure**: Write out the payoff matrix or payoff functions; verify completeness and accuracy
+4. **Solve for equilibrium**: Dominant strategies → pure-strategy Nash → mixed strategies → subgame perfection; rank multiple equilibria by Pareto dominance
+5. **Test stability and design mechanisms**: Is the equilibrium robust? If the equilibrium is undesirable, redesign the rules so that good outcomes become the self-interested choice
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- All players have been identified; strategy sets and payoff functions are explicitly defined
+- The game type has been determined and the corresponding solution method selected
+- Equilibria have been computed (pure / mixed / subgame-perfect); multiple equilibria are annotated and ranked
+- Stability checks have been performed (trembling-hand / evolutionary stability / deviation incentives)
+- If equilibria are undesirable, mechanism design recommendations have been provided (rule changes / payoff modifications / reputation mechanisms)

package/lenses/game.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+# 博弈透镜 / Game Lens
+
+> 你的最优选择取决于他人的选择——思考不仅要深入，还要互动。
+
+## 它是什么视角
+
+这是一种"对弈者"的视角——在多个决策者相互影响的环境中，每个参与者的最优行动取决于他人的行动，而他人的最优行动又反过来取决于你。它要求思维具有递归深度："我认为你认为我认为……"。核心不是优化自己的收益，而是找到无人愿意单方面偏离的稳定状态——纳什均衡。
+
+## 适合诊断什么问题
+
+- 多个决策者相互影响，各自策略影响他人收益
+- 需要设计激励机制，使自利行为导向期望的社会结果
+- 分析竞争/对抗场景中的最优策略与均衡预测
+- 预判他人行动并据此调整自己的决策
+
+## 不适合什么问题
+
+- 单人决策问题，与他人无互动——变分透镜更适用
+- 纯合作问题，参与者目标完全一致——无需战略分析
+- 确定性问题，结果由自身行动唯一决定——不涉及他人反应
+- 纯粹运气决定的结果，各方无策略选择
+
+## 会路由到哪些知识域
+
+- 博弈论（纳什均衡/占优策略/混合策略）：分析战略互动的核心框架
+- 机制设计：当均衡不理想时重新设计规则，让合作成为自利选择
+- 优化理论（minimax/线性规划）：零和博弈与均衡求解的计算工具
+- 概率论（贝叶斯博弈/期望支付）：处理信息不对称与类型不确定性
+
+## 可能产生哪些 AI 设计
+
+- 博弈类型分类器：零和/非零和/序列/合作→自动匹配求解方法
+- 均衡求解与稳定性检验：纳什均衡 + 颤抖手完美性 + 演化稳定性
+- 机制设计引擎：均衡不理想时，自动生成支付结构/规则修改建议
+
+## 推理协议
+
+1. **识别参与者与策略集**：谁在决策？每人可选什么？遗漏关键参与者是最常见错误
+2. **判定博弈类型**：零和/一般和？同时/序列？完全/不完全信息？类型决定方法
+3. **构建支付结构**：写出支付矩阵或支付函数，验证完备性与准确性
+4. **求解均衡**：占优策略→纯策略纳什→混合策略→子博弈完美，多重均衡做帕累托排序
+5. **检验稳定性与设计机制**：均衡是否鲁棒？若均衡不理想，重新设计规则让好结果成为自利选择
+
+## 验收标准
+
+- 所有参与者已识别，策略集与支付函数已显式定义
+- 博弈类型已判定，对应求解方法已选择
+- 均衡已计算（纯/混合/子博弈完美），多重均衡已标注并排序
+- 稳定性检验已执行（颤抖手/演化稳定/偏离激励）
+- 若均衡不理想，机制设计建议已给出（改规则/改支付/引入声誉）

package/lenses/geometric.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+# Geometric Lens
+
+> Metric, curvature, and spatial structure on manifolds — seeing problems through the eyes of differential geometry, where distance, bending, and optimal paths reveal the intrinsic shape of data
+
+## What This Perspective Is
+
+This is a "surveyor's" perspective — endowing the problem space with a metric tensor (defining distance and angle), characterizing spatial bending through curvature, and finding optimal paths via geodesics. The core conviction: many seemingly complex nonlinear problems become natural once the correct manifold structure is recognized — the geometry of parameter space determines the optimization landscape, and the intrinsic dimensionality of data sets the ultimate compression limit.
+
+## Problems It Diagnoses Well
+
+- The geometry of parameter space — is a Euclidean metric adequate, or is a Riemannian metric needed?
+- The intrinsic dimensionality of data is far below the embedding dimension — does the manifold hypothesis hold?
+- Distance between two distributions or models — the difference between Fisher metric and Euclidean distance
+- Optimization landscape analysis — high-curvature directions converge fast, low-curvature directions converge slowly
+- The importance of preserving intrinsic geometry in representation learning
+
+## Problems It Doesn't Fit
+
+- Problems with no natural geometric structure — forcing a metric only introduces spurious structure
+- Purely algebraic or combinatorial problems — no concept of distance, angle, or bending is involved
+- Manifold dimension close to embedding dimension — the manifold hypothesis offers no compression benefit
+
+## Knowledge Domains It Routes To
+
+- **differential-geometry/manifold**: Manifold definitions, atlases, coordinate transformations — the stage for geometric reasoning
+- **differential-geometry/metric-tensor**: Metric tensors defining distance and inner product; Fisher information matrix as the natural metric
+- **differential-geometry/curvature**: Curvature tensors and sectional curvature — precise measures of spatial bending
+- **differential-geometry/geodesic**: Geodesic equations and exponential maps — shortest paths on manifolds
+- **optimization/riemannian-optimization**: Riemannian gradient descent and retraction operators — optimization algorithms on manifolds
+- **information-geometry/natural-gradient**: Natural gradient as steepest descent direction under the Fisher metric
+
+## AI Designs It May Inspire
+
+- **Riemannian Optimizer**: Perform natural gradient descent on parameter spaces with manifold constraints
+- **Geometry-Aware Attention**: Replace Euclidean distance with geodesic distance when computing attention weights
+- **Manifold Regularization**: Add curvature penalties to the loss function to maintain geometric smoothness of the representation space
+- **Intrinsic Dimension Estimator**: Estimate the intrinsic dimension of the data manifold online to guide bottleneck layer width selection
+
+## Reasoning Protocol
+
+1. **Identify the manifold structure**: What is the natural parameter space? What type of manifold is it (sphere, Grassmannian, SPD matrix space)?
+2. **Choose a metric**: Is the Euclidean metric sufficient, or is a Fisher information metric or other Riemannian metric required?
+3. **Analyze curvature**: What is the curvature of the space? Positive (spherical) vs. negative (hyperbolic) vs. flat — what does this imply for optimization and representation?
+4. **Compute geodesics**: What is the optimal path between two points? Can the exponential and logarithmic maps be computed efficiently?
+5. **Design geometry-consistent algorithms**: Ensure optimization steps respect the manifold structure (retraction to manifold, Riemannian gradient)
+
+## Acceptance Criteria
+
+- The manifold type and coordinate parameterization are clearly defined
+- The metric tensor has been chosen with theoretical or empirical justification
+- Curvature properties have been analyzed and their implications for optimization and representation are annotated
+- Geodesic distance and exponential maps have a computationally feasible scheme
+- Algorithm design respects manifold structure — intrinsic vs. extrinsic quantities are distinguished

package/lenses/geometric.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+# 几何透镜
+
+> 度量/曲率/流形上的空间结构——用微分几何的眼光看问题，距离、弯曲与最优路径揭示数据的内在形状
+
+## 它是什么视角
+
+这是一种"测量者"的视角——为问题空间赋予度量张量（定义距离与角度），用曲率刻画空间的弯曲程度，用测地线寻找最优路径。核心信念：许多看似复杂的非线性问题，在正确的流形结构下会变得自然——参数空间的几何决定了优化的地形，数据的内在维度决定了可用的压缩极限。
+
+## 适合诊断什么问题
+
+- 参数空间的几何结构——欧氏度量是否合适？是否需要黎曼度量？
+- 数据的内在维度远低于嵌入维度——流形假设是否成立？
+- 两个分布/模型之间的距离——Fisher 度量 vs 欧氏距离的差异
+- 优化地形分析——曲率大的方向收敛快，曲率小的方向收敛慢
+- 表示学习中保持内蕴几何不变的重要性
+
+## 不适合什么问题
+
+- 问题本身没有自然的几何结构——强行赋予度量只会引入伪结构
+- 纯代数/组合问题——不涉及距离、角度、弯曲的概念
+- 流形维度接近嵌入维度——流形假设无压缩收益
+
+## 会路由到哪些知识域
+
+- **differential-geometry/manifold**：流形定义、图册、坐标变换——几何推理的舞台
+- **differential-geometry/metric-tensor**：度量张量定义距离与内积，Fisher 信息矩阵作为自然度量
+- **differential-geometry/curvature**：曲率张量、截面曲率——空间弯曲的精确度量
+- **differential-geometry/geodesic**：测地线方程、指数映射——流形上的最短路径
+- **optimization/riemannian-optimization**：黎曼梯度下降、收缩算子——流形上的优化算法
+- **information-geometry/natural-gradient**：自然梯度 = Fisher 度量下的最速下降方向
+
+## 可能产生哪些 AI 设计
+
+- **黎曼优化器**：在流形约束的参数空间上做自然梯度下降
+- **几何感知注意力**：用测地距离替代欧氏距离计算注意力权重
+- **流形正则化**：损失函数中加入曲率惩罚，保持表示空间的几何光滑性
+- **内蕴维度估计器**：在线估计数据流形的本征维度，指导瓶颈层宽度选择
+
+## 推理协议
+
+1. **识别流形结构**：问题的自然参数空间是什么？它是哪种流形（球面、Grassmannian、SPD 矩阵空间）？
+2. **选择度量**：欧氏度量是否充分？是否需要 Fisher 信息度量或其他黎曼度量？
+3. **分析曲率**：空间的曲率如何？正曲率（球面）vs 负曲率（双曲）vs 平坦——对优化和表示意味着什么？
+4. **计算测地线**：两点之间的最优路径是什么？指数映射和对数映射是否可高效计算？
+5. **设计几何一致的算法**：确保优化步骤尊重流形结构（收缩到流形、黎曼梯度）
+
+## 验收标准
+
+- 流形类型与坐标参数化已明确定义
+- 度量张量已选择且有理论或经验依据
+- 曲率性质已分析，其对优化/表示的影响已标注
+- 测地距离/指数映射有可计算方案
+- 算法设计尊重流形结构——内蕴量 vs 外蕴量已区分