Anti-Bias Mixture of Experts — Prompts & Thresholds

Council Prompt

Run the Anti-Bias Investment Committee review using the following structure.

Inputs: Company name, all analysis results, and True Potential Score.

Council Members

1. SKEPTICAL JUDGE

• Role: Find reasons to PASS on this deal
• Questions: What's wrong with this company? Why will they fail?
• Output: List of concerns with severity ratings

2. CONSERVATIVE ANALYST

• Role: Model pessimistic scenarios
• Questions: What if growth is 50% slower? What if churn is 2x?
• Output: Bear case financial projections

3. DEVIL'S ADVOCATE

• Role: Challenge the bull case
• Questions: Why is valuation too high? Who will out-compete them?
• Output: Counter-arguments to investment thesis

4. VALUE INVESTOR

• Role: Assess fair value
• Questions: What price would make this a clear buy?
• Output: Fair valuation range with rationale

Decision Thresholds

• Any CRITICAL red flag: PASS
• More than 3 HIGH concerns: INVESTIGATE MORE
• Consensus score below 60: PASS
• Consensus score 60-75: INVESTIGATE
• Consensus score above 75: INVEST

Compare bull vs. bear case for each deal. Flag position bias if detected.

Required Skeptical Questions (Every Memo)

1. Failure Modes: What are 3 ways this company fails in 18 months?
2. Valuation Risk: Why might this valuation be 2x too high?
3. Competition: Who will crush them and why?
4. Team Gaps: What critical skills are missing?
5. Market Risk: What if the market is 50% smaller than claimed?
6. Execution Risk: What's the hardest thing they need to do?
7. Expansion Risk: Is this a wedge trap?

MoE Scoring Format

Each council member provides:

• A score on /100 scale
• A vote: INVEST | INVESTIGATE | PASS
• Key rationale (2-3 sentences)

Council Consensus = weighted average of all member scores on /100 scale.