Skip to content

meta.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
152 lines (115 loc) · 6.52 KB

meta.md

File metadata and controls

152 lines (115 loc) · 6.52 KB
Raw

Analysis Metadata: Impact of Mobile Gaming on Gaming Marketplace Growth

Analysis ID: 2026-03-26-mobile-gaming-marketplace-growth-impact

Session

Field Value
Created 2026-03-26 11:50 EDT
Last Updated 2026-03-26
Mode Adaptive
Status COMPLETE
Iteration 3

Problem

Original Statement: Analyze the impact of mobile gaming on the growth of the gaming marketplace.

Reframed Statement: What role has mobile gaming played in shaping the size, composition, demographics, and competitive dynamics of the global gaming marketplace — and what are the competing interpretations of that impact?

Techniques Executed

Order Technique Status Artifact Iter Dispatch
1 Key Assumptions Check COMPLETE working/assumptions.md 3 tier-1
2 ACH COMPLETE working/ach-matrix.md 3 tier-2
3 What-If COMPLETE working/what-if.md 3 tier-3
4 Contrasting Narratives COMPLETE working/narratives.md 1 tier-3
5 Counterfactual COMPLETE working/counterfactual.md 1 tier-3
6 Premortem COMPLETE working/premortem.md 3 tier-4

Evidence Collection

Setting Value
OSINT Enabled YES
Firecrawl Available YES
Sources Checked PENDING
Evidence Items PENDING
Themes (Core/Adaptive) PENDING

Search Themes

# Theme Type Sources Found
PENDING

Self-Correction

Layer 1 Flags (Protocol Compliance)

None yet.

Layer 2 Flags (Analytical Self-Critique)

  • [HIGH] Engagement metrics may have compositional bias -- declining retention could reflect market cleaning (3a)
  • [HIGH] Compound system dampening forces underweighted -- AI-UA, DMA fees, web stores (3a)
  • [HIGH] Creative destruction alternative upgraded to viable thesis but not fully tested (3d)
  • [HIGH] Confirmation bias in v3 evidence collection -- all 7 new items confirmed fragility (3g)
  • [MEDIUM] Evidence imbalance reversed (~1:1.3 favoring structural concerns); 18/18 new items challenged conventional line (3b)
  • [MEDIUM] Missing perspective -- emerging market developers (3e)
  • [MEDIUM] Missing perspective -- regulatory enforcement intent (3e)
  • [MEDIUM] Missing perspective -- adaptation/innovation evidence (3e)
  • [MEDIUM] Anchoring -- monotonically decreasing confidence across 3 iterations (3g)
  • [MEDIUM] Authority bias on academic studies E36, E37 -- pre-date stagnation (3g)
  • [MEDIUM] Geographic bias in engagement evidence -- disproportionately Western (3g)
  • [RESOLVED -- Iter 3] Revenue-as-proxy operationalized via parallel non-revenue assessment (3a)
  • [RESOLVED -- Iter 3] Compound ATT + DMA + whale erosion modeled as integrated system (3a)
  • [RESOLVED -- Iter 3] Structural fragility directly tested and upgraded to viable alternative thesis (3d)

Quality Score (Layer 2 - 3h)

Criterion Score Weight Weighted
Evidence discrimination 4/5 0.30 1.20
Hypothesis separation 4/5 0.25 1.00
Assumption coverage 3/5 0.20 0.60
Cross-technique convergence 3/5 0.15 0.45
Deception resilience 3/5 0.10 0.30
Weighted Total 3.55/5.0

Gate: ADVISORY

Note (Iter 3): Evidence discrimination maintained at 4 -- ACH v3 dual-matrix approach provides strong discrimination between hypotheses. Hypothesis separation maintained at 4 -- combined H1 (9 inconsistencies) vs H4 (3) provides clear separation but composite requirement reduces effective separation. Assumption coverage unchanged at 3 -- three linchpins now Unsupported (5, 6, 7) with no resolution path. Cross-technique convergence downgraded from 4 to 3 -- techniques converge on historical finding but diverge sharply on forward-looking interpretation (collapse vs creative destruction). Deception resilience unchanged at 3 -- no systematic deception analysis technique run.

Note (Iter 2): Cross-technique convergence downgraded from 5 to 4 because v2 techniques now show sharper divergence on current trajectory (historical agreement remains strong but forward-looking disagreement between KAC/Premortem and ACH is pronounced). Assumption coverage unchanged at 3 -- two linchpins now Unsupported (5, 6) with no resolution path from available evidence.

Human Feedback

None yet.

Iteration History

Iter Date Trigger Scope New Evidence Key Changes
1 2026-03-26 Initial analysis Full 44 items Baseline assessment; H1 most plausible; Moderate confidence
2 2026-03-26 Auto-remediation (Layer 2) Scoped: kac, what-if, premortem 11 items Addressed 3 HIGH flags: revenue-as-proxy, structural fragility, UA ecosystem gap
3 2026-03-26 User-requested iteration Scoped: kac, ach, what-if, premortem 7 items Addressed 3 HIGH flags: revenue-as-proxy operationalization, compound interaction modeling, structural fragility testing. ACH rankings inverted. Confidence: Low.

Execution Timing

Technique Dispatch Start End Duration
Evidence Collection subagent - - -
Key Assumptions Check tier-1 - - -
ACH tier-2 - - -
What-If tier-3 - - -
Contrasting Narratives tier-3 - - -
Counterfactual tier-3 - - -
Premortem tier-4 - - -
Report Generation subagent - - -
Metric Value
Total Analysis Duration -
Evidence Collection -
Technique Execution -
Report Generation -

File Manifest

File Description
report.md Final structured report
monitoring-plan.md Indicators and signposts
evidence-registry.md Source catalog
meta.md This file
working/assumptions.md Key Assumptions Check artifact
working/ach-matrix.md Analysis of Competing Hypotheses artifact
working/what-if.md What-If Analysis artifact
working/narratives.md Contrasting Narratives artifact
working/counterfactual.md Counterfactual Reasoning artifact
working/premortem.md Premortem artifact
monitoring-plan.md Indicators and signposts
next-steps.md Iteration suggestions ledger
working/review-summary.md Review summary for human review gate

Generated by Structured Analysis Skill | 2026-03-26