Skip to content

cross-session-intelligence.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
270 lines (196 loc) · 19.4 KB

cross-session-intelligence.md

File metadata and controls

270 lines (196 loc) · 19.4 KB

🔄 Cross-Session Intelligence Template — Riksmöte Progression

📌 Template Instructions — Copy to analysis/daily/$ARTICLE_DATE/$SUBFOLDER/cross-session-intelligence.md. Used by weekly-review, monthly-review, and quarterly aggregation runs. See per-artifact-methodologies.md §cross-session-intelligence.

🎯 Purpose — Narrate the progression of parliamentary politics across Riksdag sessions within a period (week / month / quarter). Distinct from cross-run-diff.md (which is cross-run of the same article type on consecutive days). This file is the session-over-session story: how the political programme matured, where momentum accelerated, which session was the crystallisation moment.

🔄 Tradecraft Context

  • F3EAD stage — Exploit + Analyse: synthesises the factual record from session-baseline.md into narrative intelligence about political progression; builds judgment about momentum, coalition geometry, and agenda-setting; feeds forward-indicators.md
  • Primary analytical question — How did the political agenda, coalition geometry, and substantive legislative momentum evolve across the sessions in scope, and which sitting functioned as the decisive crystallisation point?
  • Scope discipline — Compare sessions within the same review period (week / month / quarter) and the same riksmöte. This template is for cross-session progression, not consecutive-day same-artifact change tracking (that belongs in cross-run-diff.md)
  • Required evidence base — Ground every progression claim in traceable parliamentary evidence: dok_id, proposition / betänkande references, vote outcomes, committee handling, party statements, speaker interventions, dated session markers
  • Analytical method — Identify the baseline session, track each subsequent acceleration / stall / reversal, separate procedural movement from substantive political change, distinguish noise from durable agenda-setting
  • Output standard — Explain what changed, when it changed, why that session mattered, and what the progression implies for the next period
  • Counter-narrative discipline — Every momentum claim must include a competing interpretation (even if weaker); silence is not counter-narrative

📐 Template Contract — every fill of this template MUST satisfy this row.

Slot Value
Owning methodology per-artifact-methodologies.md
Owning gate check Supplementary Check 11 (Tier-C aggregation) — see 05-analysis-gate.md
Required inputs past Riksdag-session run folders
Horizon band mixed (week/month/quarter) (per scripts/horizon-context.ts)
Output family Operational Supplementary
Aggregation order appended (alphabetical, after canonical block) (see scripts/render-lib/aggregator/order.ts)
Reader Intelligence Guide row generated from cross-session-intelligence.md (see scripts/render-lib/aggregator/reader-guide.ts)
Canonical evidence anchor | claim | evidence (dok_id / vote / MP intressent_id / primary-source URL) | retrieved_at | confidence | — every analytical claim row uses this schema.

Cross-reference: README.md §Template ↔ Methodology ↔ Gate-Check Matrix.

📋 Document Metadata

Field Value
Report ID [REQUIRED: CSI-YYYY-MM-DD-runNN]
Period Covered [REQUIRED: e.g. Week 17 2026, Apr 2026, Q2 2026]
Sessions in Scope [REQUIRED: ≥ 2 plenary sittings; list dates]
Riksmöte [REQUIRED: e.g. 2025/26]
Confidence [REQUIRED: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 with 1-line rationale]
Baseline session [REQUIRED: date of opening session; this is the anchor]
Crystallisation session [REQUIRED: date of the most consequential session in the period]

1️⃣ Session Overview

Session Dates Sitting days Kammaren / utskott fokus Antagna texter Voteringar Avg discipline % Tema
[REQUIRED] [REQUIRED] [#] [Kammaren / FiU / JuU / …] [#] [#] [%] [REQUIRED: 1-line theme]
[REQUIRED] [REQUIRED] [#] […] [#] [#] [%] […]
[REQUIRED] [REQUIRED] [#] […] [#] [#] [%] […]

Period totals — [# sitting days], [# antagna betänkanden / propositioner], [# voteringar], [# anföranden], [# interpellationer], [# skriftliga frågor].

Period average coalition margin — [# seats over 175 majority; list range min–max across votes]

2️⃣ Progression Diagram

%%{init: {"theme":"dark","themeVariables":{"primaryColor":"#1565C0","primaryTextColor":"#ffffff","lineColor":"#90CAF9","secondaryColor":"#2E7D32","tertiaryColor":"#FF9800","fontFamily":"Inter, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"}}}%%
timeline
    title Riksdag progression — period in scope
    section Opening
      Session 1 : [dok_id or key vote] : [Party position at opening]
    section Development
      Session 2 : [dok_id or key vote] : [Momentum indicator — acceleration / stall]
    section Crystallisation
      Session 3 : [Crystallisation event — name it] : [Decisive outcome — win/loss/compromise]
    section Close
      Period end : [State of play at close] : [Forward implication]
Loading

Replace placeholders with actual dok_id / MP / vote references. Every timeline event must name ≥ 1 concrete document or vote.

3️⃣ Momentum Narrative

Minimum 15 lines (Standard) / 25 lines (Deep) / 40 lines (Comprehensive). This is the analytical core of the artifact. Do not summarise session-baseline.md — interpret the pattern of change.

Required narrative beats (each must cite at least one source):

  1. Opening stance — Describe precisely where positions sat at the start of the period. Name the dominant party bloc and opposition stance with reference to the first session's key votes (dok_id). Avoid "the parties disagreed" without naming them and citing evidence.

  2. Inflection points — Name the specific session, debate, or vote that shifted momentum. Cite dok_id, vote tally, and date. If there were multiple inflection points, rank them by significance. "Momentum shifted on [date] when [party] [action] with [vote result]" — this level of specificity is required.

  3. Peak / crystallisation — Name the crystallisation moment: the single session or vote that determined the period's political direction. Explain why this session mattered more than the others.

  4. Counter-narrative — [COUNTER-NARRATIVE] — present the strongest competing interpretation. Example: "An alternative reading is that what appeared as a coalition shift was actually [X]…". This is mandatory even if the counter-narrative is weak; its weakness should be explained.

  5. Trailing indicators — What stabilised or rebounded after the peak? Did any party adjust its position post-crystallisation? Cite any public statements (anföranden dok_id) or press releases.

  6. Close — Where do positions stand at period end relative to the opening? Net gain/loss per bloc? Any issues that are primed for the next period?

Every named actor must come with role + intressent_id (for MPs) or myndighet name + dated reference.

4️⃣ Cross-Session Cluster Map

Identify policy clusters that span ≥ 2 sessions in the period. A cluster = a set of related documents (motions, betänkanden, propositioner, interpellationer) around a single policy theme.

Cluster Sessions touched Key dok_ids Lead MPs / parties Stage progression End-of-period status
[e.g. Klimat / Energi] [list session dates] [dok_ids] [MPs + intressent_id] [motion → utskott → kammaren → beslut / stalled] [adopted / withdrawn / carried to next period]
[e.g. Försvar] [list] [dok_ids] [MPs] [prop. → FöU → kammaren] […]
[e.g. Sjukvård] [list] [dok_ids] [MPs] […] […]

Cluster analysis — [1–2 sentences: which cluster showed the most momentum? which stalled? what does the cluster map imply about the legislative programme's actual pace?]

5️⃣ Vote-Discipline Time-Series

Source: search_voteringar grouped by parti per session. Discipline definition: % of party MPs voting with majority of their party caucus in each session. Δ column = Session N vs Session 1.

Party Session 1 % Session 2 % Session 3 % Δ (S1→SN) Trend Interpretation
S [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→ [1-line: e.g. cohesion increasing as opposition unified against budget]
M [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→
SD [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→
V [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→
MP [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→
C [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→
L [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→
KD [%] [%] [%] [±] ↑/↓/→

Discipline chart:

%%{init: {'theme':'dark'}}%%
xychart-beta
  title "Party vote discipline % by session"
  x-axis ["S1-S", "S1-M", "S1-SD", "S1-V", "S2-S", "S2-M", "S2-SD", "S2-V", "S3-S", "S3-M", "S3-SD", "S3-V"]
  y-axis "Discipline %" 50 --> 100
  bar [95, 97, 98, 96, 93, 95, 96, 97, 94, 96, 97, 98]
Loading

Replace sample values with actual computed discipline percentages.

Discipline interpretation — [1–2 sentences: which party showed the most volatility? does declining discipline correlate with specific issue clusters? cite defectors by name + intressent_id if ≥ 2 named breakaways in any session]

6️⃣ Coalition Formation Events

Record every cross-bloc vote coalition that formed and dissolved in the period. Distinguish structural (recurring cross-bloc alignment) from tactical (one-off for a specific vote).

Session Date Issue Coalition formed dok_id Outcome Pivotal MPs Type
[REQUIRED] [YYYY-MM-DD] [1-line] [e.g. M+KD+L+SD] [dok_id] [won / lost / abstained-block] [MPs + intressent_id if decisive] [structural / tactical]

Cross-bloc pattern analysis:

  • Tidö coalition stability: [consistently held / fractured on [issue]]
  • Opposition unified front: [consistently unified / split on [issue]]
  • Structural alliance outside Tidö: [any recurring M+C or S+MP pattern? cite evidence]
  • Pivotal single-party behaviour: [any party consistently breaking bloc? cite sessions + votes]

7️⃣ Agenda-Setting Analysis

Who controlled the agenda in this period? Did the government set the terms, or did the opposition succeed in forcing debates on their preferred ground?

Agenda-setter Issue Mechanism Sessions affected Evidence Outcome
[Government / Opposition party / Utskott / External event] [1-line] [prop. filing / interpellation campaign / media pressure / external event] [list] [dok_ids + anföranden] [succeeded / partially / failed]

Agenda dominance score:

  • Government-originated items as % of period legislative output: [%]
  • Opposition-forced debates as % of total anföranden: [%]
  • External-event-driven items (EU, NATO, economic data): [%]

Counter-narrative on agenda-setting: [COUNTER-NARRATIVE] — [present alternative reading of who was actually in control; e.g. "While government appeared to control the calendar, opposition interpellation pressure on [issue] effectively forced a floor debate the government had sought to avoid"]

8️⃣ Momentum Indicators (for next period's forward-indicators.md)

Every item here must appear in forward-indicators.md with a dated trigger.

  • Accelerating issue — [REQUIRED: name issue + sessions showing acceleration + supporting dok_id]
    • Projected continuation: [WEP tag — e.g. "Very likely (85 %) to advance to kammaren vote in next period based on FiU timetable"]
  • Decelerating issue — [REQUIRED: name issue + evidence of deceleration + reasons]
    • Projected continuation: [WEP tag]
  • Dormant-but-primed — [REQUIRED: a motion withdrawn but refileable, a bill stalled in committee, an interpellation unanswered — name it with dok_id]
    • Re-activation trigger: [identify the specific event that would reactivate it]
  • External trigger watched — [REQUIRED: external event that could change the period's momentum — e.g. EU council vote, Riksbank decision, SÄPO threat assessment, IMF WEO release]
    • Expected date: [YYYY-MM-DD]
    • Impact channel: [which issue cluster would this affect?]

9️⃣ Period Quality Check

Check Status Evidence
All sessions in session-baseline.md covered [✅/❌] [list sessions confirmed]
≥ 2 independent data sources per session [✅/❌] [list sources per session]
Party-neutrality arithmetic across sessions [✅/❌] [confirm representation balance — see reference-analysis-quality §4]
Narrative does not favour any party [✅/❌] [self-audit note in methodology-reflection.md §Pass-2]
Counter-narrative present in §3 [✅/❌] [quote the counter-narrative sentence]
Forward indicators (§8) linked in forward-indicators.md [✅/❌] [confirm links]
Coalition formation events cited with dok_id [✅/❌] [list dok_ids]
Every named MP carries intressent_id [✅/❌] [spot-check 5 names]

🔗 Cross-References

Template version: v2.0 · Last updated: 2026-04-25

✅ Pass-2 Self-Audit Checklist (v4.4 — required)

Purpose: AI-FIRST principle requires a Pass-2 read-back-and-improve. After producing this artifact in Pass 1, re-read it end-to-end and verify each item below. Document any remediation in methodology-reflection.md §"Pass-2 audit log". Any unchecked ❌ box at the end of Pass 2 forces a Pass-3 rewrite of the affected section.

  • Tradecraft anchors honoured — F3EAD stage matches the artifact's role; PIRs declared in the §Tradecraft Context block are actually addressed in the body; Admiralty grades attached to every external source; WEP band + ODNI confidence on every probabilistic judgement.
  • Source diversity floor met — at least the minimum number of independent MCP sources required by the artifact's tradecraft block are cited; single-source claims are explicitly labelled [SINGLE-SOURCE — corroboration pending].
  • Evidence specificity — every quantified claim cites a dok_id (Riksdag), an SCB / IMF dataflow code, or a named external source with date; no "according to data" / "studies show" hand-waves.
  • Named-actor discipline — every political claim names ≥ 1 person (party + role + dated act/quote) or labels the absence ([diffuse — no named actor]).
  • Counter-narrative present — at least one explicit competing hypothesis, dissent quote, or framed objection appears in the body; "no opposition recorded" is itself a finding to label, not silence.
  • Election 2026 lens applied — the §"Election 2026 Implications" subsection (or equivalent) addresses electoral salience, coalition pressure, and forward indicators; not boilerplate.
  • No illustrative content shipped as fact — every [REQUIRED] placeholder is filled OR removed; every Example: block is clearly fenced or removed; no fabricated dok_id, vote count, or quote leaks into the final artifact.
  • Cross-references resolve — every [link](file.md) in this artifact points to a file that exists in the run folder (analysis/daily/$ARTICLE_DATE/$SUBFOLDER/) or to a methodology / template under analysis/.
  • Mermaid renders — every fenced ```mermaid block parses (no missing class definitions, no orphan nodes, no >40-node graphs that overflow viewport on mobile).
  • Line-floor check — artifact length ≥ the per-artifact floor in reference-quality-thresholds.json; shorter artifacts trigger Pass-2 rewrite, never a [truncated] note.