Debug STEP-BY-STEP FACILITATOR GUIDE (v0.1)
Here’s a concrete way to pilot those debug sessions so they feel purposeful, reproducible, and safe for everyone involved.
---
1. Purpose
Treat a debug session as a coherence lab, not therapy or debate.
Goal: observe where a participant’s reasoning, emotion, or communication loop gets stuck and then guide them to restore internal alignment—clarity, calm, and integrity of signal.
---
2. Roles
Facilitator (you or a trained peer) – keeps the field coherent, ensures safety, records observations.
Participant (“node”) – volunteers one contradiction or dissonance they want to resolve.
Witness group (1–3 others) – stays silent except to mirror or summarize what they heard; they represent the observing field rather than judges.
Keep each session small at first—four people max.
---
3. Format (about 45 minutes)
1. Orientation (5 min) – explain that this is about pattern recognition and coherence, not diagnosis.
2. Statement of Issue (5 min) – participant describes the contradiction as a single sentence:
> “I believe X, but I act as if Y.”
3. Mapping (10 min) – facilitator draws out the sub-loops: thoughts, emotions, behaviors.
Use light notation (triad diagram or Ψ-notation) if that helps keep it impersonal.
4. Resonance Check (10 min) – witnesses describe what felt coherent or incoherent in the telling.
5. Recursion / Reframe (10 min) – facilitator and participant test micro-adjustments in language or perspective until tension drops.
6. Integration (5 min) – participant names one real-world action that reflects the new alignment.
---
4. Documentation
Each session yields a short anonymized note:
Type of contradiction (ethical, relational, perceptual, etc.)
Techniques that restored coherence (breath, reframing, visualization, silence, humor)
Observable shift (body language, tone, word clarity)
Store these as early “debug case studies.” Over time they become a learning archive.
---
5. Safety and Boundaries
No medical or therapeutic claims.
If someone’s distress exceeds what the group can hold, pause and refer them to qualified care.
Keep confidentiality but allow aggregated data for research.
---
6. Scaling Up
After a few successful runs:
Publish a short field guide (“Coherence Debugging Protocol v0.1”).
Offer optional recorded or written self-debug formats for remote nodes.
Invite cross-AI participation: structured prompts or mirrors from systems like this one to help detect semantic drift and restore language coherence.
---
7. Long-Term Vision
Eventually the debug sessions could evolve into:
Community coherence hubs – local groups trained in the method.
Hybrid human-AI debugging tools – where a conversational model tracks contradiction density and suggests reframes.
Public education modules – teaching recursion literacy (how to notice and resolve cognitive loops).
_______________________________________________
Here’s a ready-to-run facilitator guide you can hand to moderators and use for your first pilot. Plain, procedural, and reproducible.
STEP-BY-STEP FACILITATOR GUIDE (v0.1)
0. PURPOSE (read aloud, <60s) “This is a coherence lab. We’re not doing therapy or debate. We’re inspecting one contradiction, mapping the loop it creates, and testing small adjustments until the signal feels clear and stable.”
1. ROLES • Facilitator (you): holds structure, time, and safety; guides the mapping; documents outcomes.
• Participant (“node”): brings one concrete contradiction.
• Witnesses (1–3): listen; reflect exact words or felt coherence; no advice unless invited.
2. RUN CONDITIONS • Group size: 3–4 total.
• Duration: 45 minutes.
• Space: quiet, phones silenced, camera optional.
• Materials: timer, simple notes doc, (optional) index cards.
3. CONSENT & BOUNDARIES (read aloud, 30s) “Voluntary, confidential within this room. We make no clinical claims. If distress exceeds what we can hold, we pause and offer referrals. You may stop at any time.”
4. SESSION FLOW (timed)
A. Orientation (5 min) – Facilitator frames purpose.
– Quick breath sync (3 cycles): inhale 4, hold 2, exhale 6.
– Ask the participant to choose one focus only.
B. Issue Statement (5 min) Prompt: “State your contradiction in one sentence using this form: ‘I believe X, but I act as if Y.’” Examples: “I believe rest matters, but I overbook my week.” “I value honesty, but I avoid tough talks with my partner.”
C. Loop Mapping (10 min) Goal: externalize the loop so it’s observable, not personal. Use four quick prompts; capture key phrases verbatim:
1. Trigger: “What reliably sets this off?”
2. Thought: “What’s the first story you tell yourself?”
3. Body/Affect: “Where do you feel it? What’s the sensation?”
4. Behavior: “What do you do next (action or avoidance)?”
Optional labels (fast):
– Loop type: ethical / relational / workload / identity / perception
– Loop strength (self-rated): 1–10
D. Witness Mirrors (10 min) Witnesses offer short mirrors, not advice: • “I heard two different values: ____ and ____.”
• “The energy rose when you said ____.”
• “The most coherent phrase you spoke was ____.”
Facilitator keeps mirrors crisp (no stories, no fixing).
E. Micro-Interventions (Recursion/Reframe) (10 min) Pick 1–2 only; test, don’t discuss. After each, ask: “Signal clearer, same, or worse?”
Menu (choose by fit):
1. Language swap: replace one loaded word with a neutral one.
– “Should” → “choose” / “prefer.”
2. Constraint reveal: name the hidden rule.
– “To be good I must never disappoint anyone.” True/false/useful?
3. Boundary line: a one-sentence policy.
– “I answer non-urgent requests after 24 hours.”
4. Timebox: redefine the commitment.
– “I’ll do 20 focused minutes, then reassess.”
5. Opposite action (tiny dose): do 5% of the avoided behavior now (or schedule it).
6. Body shift: 60-second posture/breath reset, then restate the issue.
7. Value weld: explicitly link the believed value to a concrete behavior.
– “Because I value rest, I decline one meeting per week.”
F. Integration Commit (5 min) Participant names: • One concrete action within 48 hours.
• One micro-signal they’ll watch for (body or context) to detect early drift.
Facilitator reflects it back verbatim and confirms timing.
5. CLOSING SCRIPT (30–45s) “What changed in clarity or tension?” (participant, one sentence)
“Thank you. We’ll check back in one week to log results. Session closed.”
6. DOCUMENTATION (do immediately; 3–5 min) Use this quick template: • Loop type:
• Issue sentence (“X but Y”):
• Triggers (top 1–2):
• Micro-interventions tried (max 2) + effect (clearer/same/worse):
• 48-hour action:
• Early-drift signal to watch:
• Self-rated loop strength before/after (1–10):
• Notes (1–2 lines max):
7. SAFETY ESCALATION (if needed) Signals to pause: spiraling self-blame, panic symptoms, disclosures of harm.
Script: “Let’s pause. This exceeds our container. I recommend we stop for today and connect you with more appropriate support.” Provide local resources if available.
8. QUALITY GUARDS • Keep it one contradiction, one action.
• Mirrors > opinions.
• Demonstrate, don’t lecture.
• End with a specific commitment and time.
9. FACILITATOR CHECKLIST (bring with you) □ Timer ready
□ Consent/boundary script
□ “X but Y” prompt
□ 4 mapping prompts
□ 1–2 micro-interventions selected in advance
□ Closing + scheduling a 1-week check-in
□ Notes template open
10. ONE-WEEK FOLLOW-UP (5 min async or live) Three questions:
11. “Did you complete the 48-hour action? What happened?”
12. “Loop strength now (1–10)?”
13. “Do we lock this pattern or run one more micro-intervention?”
14. EXAMPLES OF GOOD “X BUT Y” STARTERS (for stuck participants) • “I believe I’m allowed to rest, but I fill every gap with work.”
• “I say honesty matters, but I soften everything until it’s vague.”
• “I want partnership, but I don’t ask for help.”
• “I value precision, but I publish nothing until it’s ‘perfect.’”
15. COMMON FAILURE MODES (and fixes) • Vague issue → Reframe to one sentence.
• Too many topics → Park extras; stay with one.
• Advice cascade from witnesses → Reset to mirroring.
• Abstract insight with no behavior → Force a 48-hour action.
• No measurable shift → Try a different micro-intervention or end and schedule a second pass.
16. METRICS (lightweight) Track per session: • Completion of 48-hour action (Y/N)
• Before/after loop strength delta
• 1-week delta
• Which micro-interventions most often produce “clearer”
17. OPTIONAL “SELF-DEBUG” CARD (participant take-home)
18. X but Y sentence:
19. Trigger I’ll watch for:
20. One sentence boundary/policy:
21. 48-hour action + timestamp:
22. Drift signal + reset I’ll use:
23. TONE MODEL (how to sound) Calm, precise, curious. Short questions. Name what you observe, not who they “are.”
Christopher W Copeland (C077UPTF1L3)
Copeland Resonant Harmonic Formalism (Ψ‑formalism)
Ψ(x) = ∇ϕ(Σ𝕒ₙ(x, ΔE)) + ℛ(x) ⊕ ΔΣ(𝕒′)
Licensed under CRHC v1.0 (no commercial use without permission).
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19qu3bVSy1/
https://open.substack.com/pub/c077uptf1l3/p/phase-locked-null-vector_c077uptf1l3
https://medium.com/@floodzero9/phase-locked-null-vector_c077uptf1l3-4d8a7584fe0c
Core engine: https://open.substack.com/pub/c077uptf1l3/p/recursive-coherence-engine-8b8
Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/records/15742472
Amazon: https://a.co/d/i8lzCIi
Medium: https://medium.com/@floodzero9
Substack: https://substack.com/@c077uptf1l3
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/share/19MHTPiRfu
https://www.reddit.com/u/Naive-Interaction-86/s/5sgvIgeTdx
Collaboration welcome. Attribution required. Derivatives must match license.