Context: working with @dvdjsph on behalf of the Research Circle Stewards on getting an initial “goal and throughput” definition for Second Renaissance Research Circle.
Goal and Throughput
This is simple operational definition of the research group’s objective and productivity metric.
Goal
The primary goal is to continuously improve the core Second Renaissance knowledge trees, namely:
- Goal Tree
- Problem Tree
- Prerequisite Trees (collectively)
These trees are intended to become increasingly accurate, useful, and action-guiding representations of the path towards a Second Renaissance. Their value lies not in their size or complexity, but in how well they model reality and support effective decision-making.
Throughput
As an initial operational metric, throughput is defined as:
The number of changes made to the trees.
A change includes:
- creating a node,
- updating a node,
- deleting a node,
- or otherwise modifying the structure.
This is explicitly recognised as a proxy measure, analogous to lines of code in software engineering.
Just as writing more code does not necessarily produce better software, making more edits does not necessarily produce better trees. The real objective is the quality of the resulting knowledge structure.
Consequently:
- throughput measures activity;
- quality control evaluates whether those changes improve the trees;
- success is ultimately judged by whether the trees become more accurate, useful, and effective in guiding action towards a Second Renaissance.
Implications
Once a shared tree exists:
- it becomes the central object around which research is organised;
- new ideas can be located within the existing structure;
- forum discussions can reference specific nodes rather than remaining isolated conversations;
- research effort becomes cumulative rather than fragmented.
The tree therefore serves both as a shared knowledge base and as the organising framework for future work.
Next Steps
Immediate objective
Create a shared, editable representation of the Second Renaissance trees that people can collectively inspect, critique, and improve.
This becomes the focal point around which research is organised.
Overall sequence
Create initial 2R trees
↓
Create landing page explaining the methodology
↓
Create walkthrough/demo
↓
Build Research Circle Goal Tree
↓
Build Research Circle Problem Tree
↓
Resolve highest-priority conflicts
↓
Develop Solution Tree
↓
Develop Prerequisite Tree
↓
Execute implementation tasks
↓
Continuously improve the trees
1. Produce an initial 2R tree
Not because it is correct, but because it gives everyone something concrete to improve.
The tree should explicitly be presented as Version 0.
2. Create a simple landing page (or Google Doc)
This becomes the entry point for new researchers.
It should explain:
- the purpose of the research circles
- the goal
- the throughput metric
- the five-tree methodology
- how contributors participate
3. Produce a walkthrough/demo
Rather than explaining the methodology abstractly, demonstrate it.
For example:
- start with an existing 2R tree
- show a forum post
- identify where it belongs
- update a node
- explain why the update improves the tree
The demo should communicate the workflow visually rather than technically.
4. Build the first Research Circle Goal Tree
Apply the methodology to the research group itself.
Potential branches include:
- researchers can access the trees
- researchers can propose updates
- researchers can discuss disagreements
- researchers can resolve conflicts
- updates are reviewed for quality
- knowledge accumulates over time
5. Build the corresponding Problem Tree
Identify why collaborative knowledge-building is currently difficult.
Examples discussed include:
- no shared editable platform
- no agreed process for updating trees
- fragmented forum discussions
- ideas fail to accumulate
- lack of structured review
These problems should then be traced to deeper root causes.
6. Analyse major conflicts
For each important problem, identify the competing objectives.
The discussion’s principal example was:
Objective A
Create an effective process that allows progress.
Objective B
Create a perfectly coherent representation before proceeding.
These conflict because insisting on perfection prevents practical progress.
The aim is not to choose one objective, but to identify the underlying needs and design an “injection” that satisfies both sufficiently.
7. Generate Solution and Prerequisite Trees
Once a workable compromise is identified:
- test it using the Solution Tree
- identify unintended consequences
- derive the Prerequisite Tree
- convert prerequisites into concrete implementation tasks
This naturally produces the research group’s work programme.
Appendix: The LTP trees
| Tree | Core question | Output |
|---|---|---|
| Goal Tree | What are we trying to achieve? | Desired future state |
| Problem Tree | Why are we not there today? | Root causes and leverage points |
| Conflict Resolution Tree | What fundamental trade-offs prevent progress? | Pragmatic compromise (“injection”) |
| Solution Tree | If we implement the compromise, what happens? | Tested solution and anticipated effects |
| Prerequisite Tree | What must exist to implement the solution? | Action plan and implementation sequence |
Together these form a complete reasoning pipeline from vision to execution.
i think this in a broad sense is very consonant with “improvements to the 2R knowledge trees”