Files
deep_research/scripts/runtime/phase1.py
T

903 lines
47 KiB
Python
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
"""Phase 1 project initialization and framework generation."""
from __future__ import annotations
import hashlib
import json
import re
from datetime import datetime, timezone
from pathlib import Path
from typing import Any
from scripts.runtime.artifacts import PROJECTS_DIR, ensure_phase_dirs, load_manifest, write_manifest
from scripts.runtime.materials import ingest_input_materials, render_material_inventory
from scripts.runtime.methods import ResearchMethod, ResearchMethodRegistry
from scripts.runtime.tasks import AXIS_ROUTES
def utc_now_iso() -> str:
return datetime.now(timezone.utc).replace(microsecond=0).isoformat()
def slugify_topic(topic: str) -> str:
slug = re.sub(r"[^a-zA-Z0-9]+", "-", topic.lower()).strip("-")
if slug:
return slug[:80]
digest = hashlib.sha1(topic.encode("utf-8")).hexdigest()[:8]
return f"research-{digest}"
def create_project(
*,
topic: str,
slug: str | None = None,
projects_dir: Path = PROJECTS_DIR,
method_key: str | None = None,
report_type: str = "research",
model_profile: str = "medium",
target_words: int = 30000,
input_materials: list[str] | None = None,
) -> Path:
method = ResearchMethodRegistry().get(method_key)
project_slug = slug or slugify_topic(topic)
project_root = projects_dir / project_slug
if project_root.exists():
raise FileExistsError(f"project already exists: {project_root}")
ensure_phase_dirs(project_root)
(project_root / "phase0" / "inputs").mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
(project_root / "phase0" / "extracted").mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
material_inventory = ingest_input_materials(project_root, input_materials)
now = utc_now_iso()
manifest: dict[str, Any] = {
"version": "0.20.0",
"runtime": "python-core-v0.20",
"topic": topic,
"slug": project_slug,
"report_title": topic,
"type": report_type,
"work_language": "zh",
"model_profile": model_profile,
"research_method": method.key,
"target_words": target_words,
"input_materials": input_materials or [],
"material_inventory": material_inventory,
"created_at": now,
"updated_at": now,
"phase1": {
"status": "initialized",
"approved": False,
"requires_user_interview": True,
"material_brief_path": "phase1/material_brief.md",
},
"phase2": {"status": "pending"},
"phase3": {"status": "pending"},
"phase4": {"status": "pending"},
}
write_manifest(project_root, manifest)
_write_interview_seed(project_root, manifest, method)
write_material_brief(project_root, manifest, method)
return project_root
def _write_interview_seed(project_root: Path, manifest: dict[str, Any], method: ResearchMethod) -> None:
material_text = render_material_inventory(manifest.get("material_inventory") or [])
text = (
f"# Phase 1 访谈记录\n\n"
f"- 主题:{manifest['topic']}\n"
f"- 研究方法:{method.key} - {method.name}\n"
f"- 报告类型:{manifest['type']}\n"
f"- 目标字数:{manifest['target_words']}\n"
f"- 工作语言:中文主写作;检索关键词、证据摘录和来源笔记可保留英文。\n\n"
f"## 已提供材料\n\n{material_text}\n\n"
"## 后续访谈问题\n\n"
"1. 本报告最重要的决策用途是什么?\n"
"2. 是否有必须覆盖或必须排除的公司、产品、工艺、市场或法规范围?\n"
"3. 结论偏好是战略建议、风险清单、投资判断,还是执行路线图?\n"
)
(project_root / "phase1" / "interview.md").write_text(text, encoding="utf-8")
def _material_excerpt(project_root: Path, rel_path: str, *, max_chars: int = 1200) -> str:
path = project_root / rel_path
if not path.exists():
return "(未找到抽取文本)"
text = path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
compact = "\n".join(line.rstrip() for line in text.splitlines() if line.strip())
return compact[:max_chars] + ("..." if len(compact) > max_chars else "")
def _derive_material_observations(project_root: Path, inventory: list[dict[str, Any]]) -> list[str]:
combined_parts: list[str] = []
for item in inventory:
rel = item.get("ocr_extracted_to") or item.get("extracted_to")
if rel and (project_root / rel).exists():
combined_parts.append((project_root / rel).read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
text = "\n".join(combined_parts)
checks = [
("审计范围覆盖生产管理、原液、制剂和无菌相关模块,报告需要同时处理 GMP 合规、工艺转移和运营协同,而不是只写质量体系。", ["生产管理", "原液", "制剂", "无菌"]),
("材料显示高风险项为 0、中风险项为 1,适合采用“商业化 readiness 与系统成熟度差距”而非“体系失控”作为初始假设。", ["高风险 0", "中风险1", "低风险7"]),
("商业化经验、无菌保障细节、文件要求与执行一致性是需要访谈确认的主线风险。", ["商业化经验不足", "无菌保障", "文件要求与执行一致性"]),
("工艺规程、批记录、CPP/CQA、VMPR/VMP、验证主计划等内容反复出现,说明工艺验证和商业化文件体系可能是 Phase 2 的重点证据轴。", ["CPP", "CQA", "VMPR", "VMP"]),
("温度、压差、WFI、冷却段微生物、RABS/ORABS、first air、APS 等无菌和设施细节需要映射到 EU Annex 1、NMPA GMP 和企业 SOP。", ["温度", "压差", "WFI", "APS"]),
("复盘材料包含责任人和局部答复,后续整改路线图应尽量回填 owner、期限、关闭证据和复核机制。", ["填写人", "是否已经回答完整", "整改"]),
]
observations = [message for message, needles in checks if any(needle in text for needle in needles)]
return observations or ["材料已导入但尚未形成足够结构化判断;需要先访谈确认研究用途、范围和优先级。"]
def write_material_brief(
project_root: Path,
manifest: dict[str, Any] | None = None,
method: ResearchMethod | None = None,
) -> Path:
"""Write a Phase 0/1 material brief that must be reviewed before Phase 2."""
manifest = manifest or load_manifest(project_root)
method = method or ResearchMethodRegistry().get(manifest.get("research_method"))
inventory = manifest.get("material_inventory") or []
lines = [
f"# Phase 0 材料简报:{manifest.get('topic', project_root.name)}",
"",
"status: 待用户确认",
f"research_method: {method.key}",
"",
"## 已导入材料",
"",
render_material_inventory(inventory),
"",
"## 材料初步解读",
"",
"以下内容由 Python core 从已落盘材料抽样生成,只作为访谈起点;不得直接视为最终结论。",
"",
]
lines.extend(["## 初步问题聚类(待访谈确认)", ""])
for observation in _derive_material_observations(project_root, inventory):
lines.append(f"- {observation}")
lines.append("")
lines.append("## 材料摘录")
lines.append("")
for item in inventory:
rel = item.get("ocr_extracted_to") or item.get("extracted_to")
if not rel:
continue
lines.extend(
[
f"### {Path(rel).name}",
"",
_material_excerpt(project_root, rel),
"",
]
)
lines.extend(
[
"## 建议访谈确认点",
"",
"1. 本报告的最重要用途是什么:内部整改、客户沟通、董事会决策,还是外部审计准备?",
"2. 哪些审计发现最需要优先展开:无菌保障、工艺验证、数据完整性、质量体系闭环,还是运营协同?",
"3. 是否存在必须排除或脱敏的项目、人员、客户、产品或工艺信息?",
"4. 短中长期整改的时间边界如何定义,例如 30/90/180 天,还是按临床/商业化里程碑划分?",
"5. 是否需要把 NMPA、FDA、EMA、ICH、WHO 的法规基线分别映射到整改责任人和证据包?",
"",
"## Gate",
"",
"请用户确认本材料简报与访谈问题后,再生成或批准 `phase1/framework.md` 并进入 Phase 2。",
"",
]
)
out = project_root / "phase1" / "material_brief.md"
out.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
out.write_text("\n".join(lines), encoding="utf-8")
return out
def _axis_prompt_brief(axis: str, method: ResearchMethod) -> str:
prompts = {
"input_material_findings": "从用户材料中提取现场事实、审计发现、复盘记录和内部答复,并标注原始材料位置。",
"nmpa_fda_ema_ich_who_baseline": "把 NMPA、FDA、EMA、ICH、WHO、药典或 Annex 1 等要求转化为可核验的法规基线,并纳入 FDA warning letters 与会议材料作为执法尺度参照。",
"quality_system_gap": "把现场发现映射到质量体系流程缺口,覆盖偏差、变更、CAPA、文件、培训和数据完整性;优先检索 FDA warning letters 中同类缺陷的执法表述。",
"manufacturing_process_risk": "围绕生产工艺、设施、公用系统、CPP/CQA、验证和无菌保障识别系统性风险,并用 FDA warning letters / inspection enforcement examples 校准严重度。",
"operations_management_gap": "诊断运营管理、跨部门协同、会议机制、指标体系和交付节奏的结构性问题,并参考 FDA 会议纪要/meeting materials 中对质量治理的关注点。",
"team_capability": "识别人员能力、岗位职责、质量文化和管理梯队方面的缺口与建设路径。",
"capa_roadmap": "把差距转化为短中长期 CAPA 组合,要求绑定 owner、期限、优先级、关闭证据和复核机制。",
"verification_evidence": "定义整改完成后可被审计接受的验证证据,包括记录、报告、趋势和管理评审输入。",
"counter": "主动寻找反方证据、限制条件和可能降低严重度或改变优先级的解释,避免单向论证。",
}
return prompts.get(axis, f"按照 `{method.key}` 方法,对 {axis} 轴进行证据收集、证伪和结构化归纳。")
def _material_paths(manifest: dict[str, Any]) -> list[dict[str, str]]:
materials: list[dict[str, str]] = []
for item in manifest.get("material_inventory") or []:
rel = item.get("ocr_extracted_to") or item.get("extracted_to") or item.get("copied_to")
if rel:
materials.append({"path": rel, "role": "input_material"})
return materials
def _keywords_from_title(title: str) -> list[str]:
english = re.findall(r"[A-Za-z][A-Za-z0-9/+-]{1,}", title)
chinese_parts = re.split(r"[,、;;:\s]+|和|与|及|的|在|为|从|来自|集中|决定|需要|形成|成为|不是|而是", title)
domain_terms = [
"审计",
"商业化",
"阶段门",
"风险",
"法规",
"欧盟",
"NMPA",
"GMP",
"ICH",
"无菌",
"RABS",
"First Air",
"APS",
"灯检",
"隧道",
"原液",
"WFI",
"SCADA",
"EMS",
"CPP",
"CQA",
"PPQ",
"清洁验证",
"偏差",
"变更",
"CAPA",
"数据完整性",
"人员",
"培训",
"质量文化",
"运营",
"跨部门",
"指标",
"团队",
"CDMO",
"整改",
"owner",
]
title_terms = [term for term in domain_terms if term in title]
keywords = [item.strip() for item in [*english, *title_terms, *chinese_parts] if len(item.strip()) >= 2]
seen: set[str] = set()
unique: list[str] = []
for keyword in keywords:
if keyword not in seen:
seen.add(keyword)
unique.append(keyword)
return unique[:12]
def _material_lines_for_chapter(project_root: Path, manifest: dict[str, Any], title: str, *, limit: int = 4) -> list[str]:
keywords = _keywords_from_title(title)
candidates: list[tuple[int, int, str]] = []
order = 0
for item in manifest.get("material_inventory") or []:
rel = item.get("ocr_extracted_to") or item.get("extracted_to")
if not rel:
continue
path = project_root / rel
if not path.exists():
continue
for raw in path.read_text(encoding="utf-8").splitlines():
line = raw.strip()
if len(line) < 8 or len(line) > 220:
continue
if line.startswith("#") or line.startswith("- source_path:") or line.startswith("- extracted_at:"):
continue
if "OCR Material:" in line:
continue
if re.match(r"^(审计对象|审计执行方|审计执行人|审计时间)[::]", line):
continue
score = sum(1 for keyword in keywords if keyword and keyword in line)
if score:
order += 1
candidates.append((score, order, f"{rel}{line}"))
candidates.sort(key=lambda item: (-item[0], item[1]))
return [line for _, _, line in candidates[:limit]]
def _minimum_evidence_for_method(method: ResearchMethod) -> dict[str, Any]:
if method.key == "gmp_quality_operations_diagnosis":
return {
"local_material_quotes": 2,
"official_regulatory_or_guideline_sources": 2,
"enforcement_or_best_practice_precedents": 1,
"counter_evidence_or_boundary_conditions": 1,
"actionable_remediation_items": 3,
}
return {
"high_quality_sources": 4,
"tier_1_2_sources": 2,
"counter_evidence_or_boundary_conditions": 1,
"decision_relevant_implications": 2,
}
def _central_thesis(manifest: dict[str, Any], method: ResearchMethod) -> str:
topic = manifest.get("topic") or manifest.get("report_title") or "本研究主题"
if method.key == "gmp_quality_operations_diagnosis":
return (
f"初始主判断:{topic} 不应只按审计风险项数量来评价,而应从商业化 readiness、"
"质量体系运行成熟度、生产工艺证据链和运营协同能力四条线同时诊断。Phase 2 必须用"
"现场材料原文、官方法规/指南、执法案例或标杆实践来证明、修正或推翻这一判断。"
)
return (
f"初始主判断:{topic} 需要先形成可被证据推翻的观点型框架,再由 Phase 2 按方法论证据线"
"逐项求证;不能把并发检索结果直接堆砌成报告。"
)
def _strategy_for_chapter(title: str, method: ResearchMethod) -> dict[str, Any]:
"""Return non-tautological Phase 1 strategy text for a chapter title."""
if method.key != "gmp_quality_operations_diagnosis":
return {
"core_question": f"本章需要判断:在什么证据条件下“{title}”成立,它会怎样改变最终决策?",
"bold_hypothesis": f"初始假设不是复述标题,而是预判“{title}”背后存在一个可被验证的因果机制;Phase 2 需要找证据支持、修正或推翻这个机制。",
"writing_claim": f"本章要把“{title}”写成一个可被证据检验的判断,而不是资料综述。",
"counter_evidence": [
"是否存在更简单的替代解释,能削弱本章主判断?",
"关键证据是否只来自单一来源或利益相关来源?",
"是否有反例显示本章判断只适用于部分场景?",
],
}
strategies = [
(
("审计", "阶段门"),
{
"core_question": "审计报告的低/中风险项计数,是否低估了白帆从临床/受托生产走向商业化标准时需要跨过的阶段门?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆的硬件和文件基础总体可用,但审计材料暴露的是商业化 readiness 缺口,而不是简单的若干孤立缺陷;Phase 2 应验证这些缺口是否集中在无菌保障、工艺验证、质量闭环和运营节奏。",
"writing_claim": "本章要先把“风险项清单”翻译成管理层可决策的阶段门地图,说明哪些问题影响商业化放行、客户审计和技术转移节奏。",
"counter_evidence": [
"是否已有整改证据证明这些问题只是审计时点的临时缺口?",
"低/中风险评级是否足以说明商业化阶段门影响有限?",
"审计范围有限是否导致本章不能外推到整体体系成熟度?",
],
},
),
(
("法规", "欧盟", "NMPA", "ICH"),
{
"core_question": "如果按 EU Annex 1、NMPA GMP、ICH Q9/Q10 以及 FDA 执法尺度校准,哪些现场发现的严重度和整改优先级会发生变化?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆按国内 GMP 逻辑已具备基础合规框架,但若以欧盟无菌标准和质量风险管理要求衡量,部分“低风险/建议项”会转化为体系成熟度缺口。",
"writing_claim": "本章要建立后文共用的法规基线,避免整改优先级只跟随原审计评级,而忽略国际化和商业化标准。",
"counter_evidence": [
"相关国际标准是否并不适用于当前产品阶段或委托生产边界?",
"NMPA 与欧盟/美国要求之间是否存在可接受差异?",
"是否有企业内部标准已经覆盖但审计材料未呈现?",
],
},
),
(
("无菌", "RABS", "First Air", "APS", "灯检"),
{
"core_question": "制剂线的主要无菌风险,是硬件布局不足,还是人员干预、首次气流保护、APS 覆盖和灯检标准执行证据不足?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆制剂车间硬件基础并非主要短板,真正风险在于关键无菌行为和模拟验证是否能持续证明受控;Phase 2 应重点查 First Air、RABS 干预、APS 场景设计和灯检阳性样品管理。",
"writing_claim": "本章要把无菌保障从“设施看起来合规”推进到“关键操作和验证证据可被审计接受”。",
"counter_evidence": [
"现场是否已有完整视频复核、APS 覆盖和再培训有效性证据?",
"观察到的无菌动作问题是否只是个别人员或单次拍摄偏差?",
"灯检和 RABS 风险是否已有 SOP、趋势和复核记录闭环?",
],
},
),
(
("原液", "WFI", "SCADA", "EMS"),
{
"core_question": "原液和公用系统的风险是否被一次性封闭工艺掩盖,真正缺口在 WFI、SCADA/EMS、离线记录和异常升级证据链?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:一次性反应器和封闭转移降低了暴露风险,但不能自动证明系统受控;Phase 2 应验证 WFI 冷却回流、环境/压差报警、SCADA 数据和离线检测记录是否形成完整证据链。",
"writing_claim": "本章要说明原液与公用系统不是“硬件先进即可”,而是要证明关键状态、报警、数据和异常处理持续受控。",
"counter_evidence": [
"WFI、SCADA/EMS 和离线记录是否已有验证报告与趋势复核?",
"一次性系统是否已经充分降低共线和交叉污染风险?",
"被指出的公用系统风险是否只是设计建议而非实际偏差?",
],
},
),
(
("工艺", "CPP", "CQA", "PPQ", "清洁验证"),
{
"core_question": "现有 IND 阶段工艺规程和批记录,距离商业化 PPQ、控制策略和清洁验证所需证据还差在哪里?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆目前的工艺文件足以支撑临床阶段执行,但不足以支撑商业化批记录、CPP/CQA 控制、PPQ 和清洁验证闭环;Phase 2 应查明哪些字段、参数和验证证据必须前置补齐。",
"writing_claim": "本章要把技术转移风险具体化为文件、参数、验证和批记录的硬门槛。",
"counter_evidence": [
"是否已有商业化模板、控制策略或 PPQ 草案未体现在审计材料中?",
"当前项目阶段是否尚不需要完整商业化批记录要求?",
"清洁验证和工艺验证是否已有主计划覆盖?",
],
},
),
(
("偏差", "变更", "CAPA", "数据完整性"),
{
"core_question": "白帆的问题是没有质量流程,还是流程之间的事件分类、升级、CAPA 有效性和数据完整性尚未形成运行闭环?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆已有偏差、变更和 CAPA 的流程框架,但事件何时启动偏差、何时作为变更、如何证明 CAPA 有效,以及电子/纸质数据如何贯通,仍存在运行机制缺口。",
"writing_claim": "本章要把质量体系从“有 SOP”推进到“事件能被正确分类、调查、纠正、验证并趋势复核”。",
"counter_evidence": [
"是否有趋势分析、管理评审和 CAPA effectiveness check 证明体系已经闭环?",
"个别事件分类问题是否不足以代表体系性缺口?",
"电子系统和纸质记录之间是否已有数据完整性控制?",
],
},
),
(
("人员", "培训", "质量文化"),
{
"core_question": "培训记录齐全是否真的转化为一线无菌行为、偏差判断和质量风险意识?哪些证据能证明培训有效?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆不缺培训台账,缺的是把培训结果转化为现场行为的一致性证据;如果 First Air、干预动作、事件判断和灯检执行仍需反复提醒,问题就不是“再培训一次”,而是培训有效性确认和质量文化运行机制不足。",
"writing_claim": "本章要把人员问题从“有没有培训”改写为“培训是否改变行为、降低风险、形成可复核证据”。",
"counter_evidence": [
"现场抽问、资格确认和再培训记录是否已证明人员理解到位?",
"被观察到的行为问题是否只发生在少数岗位或单次演示?",
"是否有岗位胜任力矩阵、年度复评和行为观察数据支撑人员能力?",
],
},
),
(
("运营", "跨部门", "指标", "review"),
{
"core_question": "白帆当前整改和生产准备依赖个人推动,还是已经形成跨部门例会、问题升级、指标看板和管理层复核的运营系统?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:运营短板不在于团队不努力,而在于缺少固定节奏和可视化管理系统;如果 owner、关闭证据、升级阈值和管理层 review 不稳定,整改会停留在临时协调,难以支撑商业化节奏。",
"writing_claim": "本章要说明运营管理是 GMP 风险的放大器:没有节奏、看板和升级机制,技术和质量问题会反复跨部门漂移。",
"counter_evidence": [
"是否已经存在稳定 PMO/例会/看板,只是未进入审计材料?",
"短期临时协调是否足以覆盖当前项目阶段,不需要完整运营系统?",
"owner、期限和关闭证据是否已经在复盘文件中基本清楚?",
],
},
),
(
("团队", "CDMO", "能力矩阵"),
{
"core_question": "对标成熟 CDMO,白帆最需要补齐的是人数、岗位能力,还是 QA/MSAT/工程/项目管理之间的角色分工?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆的能力缺口不是简单扩编,而是商业化 CDMO 所需的角色矩阵尚未完全成型;Phase 2 应验证 QA 独立性、MSAT 工艺支持、工程保障、生产班组和 PMO 协同能力。",
"writing_claim": "本章要给出面向商业化的团队能力地图,说明哪些能力必须自建,哪些可外部支持,哪些要通过机制补齐。",
"counter_evidence": [
"现有人员是否已具备商业化经验,只是材料未体现?",
"对标 CDMO 是否会高估当前阶段所需组织复杂度?",
"是否可通过顾问、外包或客户支持临时补足能力?",
],
},
),
(
("整改", "owner", "路线图"),
{
"core_question": "哪些整改必须立即完成,哪些属于体系补强,哪些是能力建设?每项如何绑定 owner、关闭证据和复核窗口?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:如果整改只按问题清单逐条关闭,会漏掉体系性根因;更有效的路线应分为立即纠偏、90 天体系补强和中长期能力建设三层,并为每层定义关闭证据。",
"writing_claim": "本章要把诊断转化为可执行 CAPA 组合,而不是泛泛的改进建议。",
"counter_evidence": [
"是否已有整改计划足以覆盖 owner、期限、关闭证据和 QA verification",
"部分整改是否应前移或后移,避免资源过载?",
"哪些建议若缺少法规证据,不应被列为强制整改?",
],
},
),
(
("管理层", "CAPA", "总表"),
{
"core_question": "管理层应通过什么样的 CAPA 总表、法规映射表和复核节奏,持续判断整改是否真正降低风险?",
"bold_hypothesis": "初始假设:白帆需要的不只是一次性报告,而是一套管理层可追踪的整改仪表盘;否则 CAPA 关闭会变成文件动作,无法证明风险趋势下降和商业化 readiness 提升。",
"writing_claim": "本章要把报告成果固化成管理层治理工具:CAPA 总表、法规映射、证据包和复核节奏。",
"counter_evidence": [
"现有管理评审或质量例会是否已经能承担这个功能?",
"过度表格化是否会增加一线负担而不改善风险?",
"哪些指标真正能反映风险降低,而不是制造形式化 KPI?",
],
},
),
]
for needles, strategy in strategies:
if any(needle in title for needle in needles):
return strategy
return {
"core_question": f"本章需要判断“{title}”背后的真实风险、适用边界和整改优先级。",
"bold_hypothesis": f"初始假设:{title} 不是孤立问题,而是质量体系、工艺证据或运营机制中的一个可验证缺口;Phase 2 必须用材料原文和外部证据判断其严重度。",
"writing_claim": f"本章要把“{title}”转化为可执行的诊断结论和整改要求。",
"counter_evidence": [
"该问题是否已有充分整改或验证证据?",
"是否只是阶段性限制,而非系统性缺口?",
"外部标准是否适用于当前业务边界?",
],
}
def build_chapter_planning(
project_root: Path,
manifest: dict[str, Any],
method: ResearchMethod,
titles: list[str],
*,
quota: int,
) -> list[dict[str, Any]]:
"""Build hypothesis-driven chapter plans that become Phase 2 prompt context."""
lanes = list(method.integrated_lanes or method.task_axes)
minimum_evidence = _minimum_evidence_for_method(method)
plans: list[dict[str, Any]] = []
for idx, title in enumerate(titles, start=1):
chapter_id = f"ch{idx:02d}"
material_lines = _material_lines_for_chapter(project_root, manifest, title)
if not material_lines:
material_lines = ["未在材料中自动匹配到足够线索;Phase 2 必须先回读全部输入材料并补充原文摘录。"]
strategy = _strategy_for_chapter(title, method)
core_question = strategy["core_question"]
bold_hypothesis = strategy["bold_hypothesis"]
verification_plan = [
"先从允许的本地材料提取 2-4 条原文证据,保留出处和上下文。",
f"再按方法论 evidence lanes 求证:{''.join(lanes)}。",
"每个核心判断至少匹配 2 个独立高质量来源;不足时降级为待验证判断。",
"主动搜索反方证据、低严重度解释、适用范围限制或替代原因。",
"输出时把证据、判断、整改/建议和待补证据分开,避免直接写成散文化正文。",
]
counter_evidence = strategy["counter_evidence"]
writing_claim = strategy["writing_claim"]
phase2_prompt_context = "\n".join(
[
f"章节:{chapter_id} {title}",
core_question,
bold_hypothesis,
"材料起点:",
*[f"- {line}" for line in material_lines],
"求证路线:",
*[f"- {item}" for item in verification_plan],
"必须寻找的反方/边界:",
*[f"- {item}" for item in counter_evidence],
f"写作主张:{writing_claim}",
f"最低证据要求:{json.dumps(minimum_evidence, ensure_ascii=False)}",
]
)
plans.append(
{
"chapter_id": chapter_id,
"title": title,
"suggested_words": quota,
"core_question": core_question,
"bold_hypothesis": bold_hypothesis,
"why_this_matters": "本章用于把 Phase1 的判断转化为 Phase2 可验证命题,并为最终报告保留清晰主线。",
"material_starting_points": material_lines,
"evidence_lanes": lanes,
"verification_plan": verification_plan,
"counter_evidence_to_seek": counter_evidence,
"writing_claim": writing_claim,
"minimum_evidence": minimum_evidence,
"phase2_prompt_context": phase2_prompt_context,
}
)
return plans
def build_research_brief_payload(
project_root: Path,
manifest: dict[str, Any],
method: ResearchMethod,
chapter_planning: list[dict[str, Any]] | None = None,
) -> dict[str, Any]:
"""Create the file-backed Phase 1 research brief used by task-card generation."""
axes = list(method.task_axes)
chapter_planning = chapter_planning or []
return {
"version": "0.21-alpha",
"topic": manifest.get("topic", project_root.name),
"research_method": method.key,
"method_name": method.name,
"work_language": "zh",
"tone": "事实型、整改导向、面向管理层和质量/生产负责人;避免空泛咨询腔。",
"central_question": f"如何基于已提供材料和权威法规/最佳实践,系统诊断“{manifest.get('topic', project_root.name)}”并形成可执行整改路线图?",
"central_thesis": _central_thesis(manifest, method),
"phase_logic": {
"phase1": "大胆假设:结合输入材料、访谈信息和初步搜索,定下主基调、章节命题和求证路线。",
"phase2": "小心求证:worker 只围绕 Phase1 命题收集、验证、证伪和补证,不自行重写研究方向。",
"phase3": "一致性审校:检查 Phase1 假设与 Phase2 证据是否自洽,指出需要回炉的章节或证据缺口。",
},
"phase2_mode": "chapter_integrated",
"success_criteria": [
"每个核心判断都能回到用户材料、权威法规、最佳实践或反方证据。",
"短中长期整改建议必须绑定优先级、责任、关闭证据和复核机制。",
"章节写作必须先收束主线,再使用 evidence packet;不得按 packet 机械拼贴。",
],
"phase2_inputs": {
"material_brief_path": "phase1/material_brief.md",
"framework_path": "phase1/framework.md",
"research_brief_path": "phase1/research_brief.json",
},
"materials": _material_paths(manifest),
"chapter_planning": chapter_planning,
"task_planning": {
"chapter_source": "phase1/framework.md",
"phase2_mode": "chapter_integrated",
"axes": axes,
"required_skills": [
"deep-research",
"search-gateway",
"search-strategy",
"source-quality",
"evidence-table",
"citation-manager",
],
"search_routes_by_axis": {axis: AXIS_ROUTES.get(axis, ["general"]) for axis in axes},
"axis_prompt_briefs": {axis: _axis_prompt_brief(axis, method) for axis in axes},
"stop_conditions": [
"每张任务卡至少形成 3 条可追溯 evidence_items,且不得编造 candidate_sources 以外来源。",
"关键 claim 不足 2 个独立 Tier 1-2 信源时,必须写入 open_questions 和证据缺口。",
"必须包含 counter_evidence;找不到反方证据时记录检索路径和限制。",
],
"fragmentation_guard": "并发 worker 只生产 evidence packet;章节主线由 compressed_findings 收束,禁止直接把 packet 堆成正文。",
},
"clarification_notes": {
"requires_user_review": True,
"questions_source": "phase1/material_brief.md",
"decision_items": [
"确认报告用途、受众和脱敏边界。",
"确认研究方法是否适配当前场景;MECE 只是可选方法之一。",
"确认任务切分和检索策略是否足以让低成本模型独立执行。",
],
},
}
def write_research_brief(
project_root: Path,
manifest: dict[str, Any] | None = None,
method: ResearchMethod | None = None,
chapter_planning: list[dict[str, Any]] | None = None,
) -> tuple[Path, Path]:
manifest = manifest or load_manifest(project_root)
method = method or ResearchMethodRegistry().get(manifest.get("research_method"))
payload = build_research_brief_payload(project_root, manifest, method, chapter_planning=chapter_planning)
json_path = project_root / "phase1" / "research_brief.json"
md_path = project_root / "phase1" / "research_brief.md"
json_path.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
hypothesis_path = project_root / "phase1" / "hypothesis_map.json"
json_path.write_text(json.dumps(payload, ensure_ascii=False, indent=2) + "\n", encoding="utf-8")
hypothesis_path.write_text(json.dumps(payload.get("chapter_planning") or [], ensure_ascii=False, indent=2) + "\n", encoding="utf-8")
lines = [
f"# Phase 1 Research Brief{payload['topic']}",
"",
f"- research_method: {payload['research_method']}",
f"- work_language: {payload['work_language']}",
f"- tone: {payload['tone']}",
f"- phase2_mode: {payload['phase2_mode']}",
"",
"## 中心问题",
"",
payload["central_question"],
"",
"## 主基调 / 大胆假设",
"",
payload["central_thesis"],
"",
"## Phase 逻辑",
"",
]
for phase_name, phase_text in payload["phase_logic"].items():
lines.append(f"- `{phase_name}`{phase_text}")
lines.extend([
"",
"## 成功标准",
"",
])
lines.extend(f"- {item}" for item in payload["success_criteria"])
if payload.get("chapter_planning"):
lines.extend(["", "## 章节命题与求证计划", ""])
for item in payload["chapter_planning"]:
lines.extend(
[
f"### {item['chapter_id']} {item['title']}",
"",
f"- 核心问题:{item['core_question']}",
f"- 大胆假设:{item['bold_hypothesis']}",
f"- 写作主张:{item['writing_claim']}",
f"- 证据线:{''.join(item['evidence_lanes'])}",
"- 材料起点:",
]
)
lines.extend(f" - {line}" for line in item["material_starting_points"])
lines.extend(["- 求证计划:"])
lines.extend(f" - {line}" for line in item["verification_plan"])
lines.extend([""])
lines.extend(["", "## 任务切分原则", ""])
planning = payload["task_planning"]
lines.append(planning["fragmentation_guard"])
lines.append("")
for axis in planning["axes"]:
routes = "、".join(planning["search_routes_by_axis"].get(axis, []))
prompt = planning["axis_prompt_briefs"].get(axis, "")
lines.append(f"- `{axis}`{prompt} 检索路径:{routes}")
lines.extend(["", "## 必读 Skills", ""])
lines.extend(f"- {name}" for name in planning["required_skills"])
lines.extend(["", "## 停止条件", ""])
lines.extend(f"- {item}" for item in planning["stop_conditions"])
lines.append("")
md_path.write_text("\n".join(lines), encoding="utf-8")
return md_path, json_path
CHAPTER_TEMPLATES: dict[str, list[str]] = {
"mckinsey_market": [
"核心结论先行界定市场机会与约束",
"临床与真实世界证据决定需求天花板",
"监管路径和支付环境重塑商业化节奏",
"竞争格局正在从单点产品转向组合能力",
"专利与技术壁垒决定长期利润池",
"中国市场的准入和供给能力形成独立变量",
"资本市场预期与基本面之间存在可验证偏差",
"反方证据限定结论边界并提示回撤风险",
"战略选择应围绕资源约束排序",
"执行路线图需要把证据缺口转化为行动清单",
],
"gmp_gap_assessment": [
"监管基线决定整改范围而非企业主观偏好",
"现状差距需要按法规条款和业务流程双重定位",
"质量风险分级决定 CAPA 优先级",
"根因分析质量决定整改能否闭环",
"CAPA 设计必须绑定责任人、证据和期限",
"验证计划决定整改是否可被审计接受",
"供应商和外包管理常是系统性缺口放大器",
"数据完整性风险需要独立成章处理",
"实施路线图需要平衡停线风险与合规风险",
"管理层治理机制决定整改能否持续",
],
"cmc_process_risk": [
"工艺流程图是识别放大风险的起点",
"CQA 与 CPP 的映射决定控制策略质量",
"放大过程的失效模式集中在传质、混合和稳定性",
"分析方法和放行标准决定证据可信度",
"技术转移风险来自知识隐性化和现场差异",
"供应链约束会改变工艺控制边界",
"偏差和变更管理决定商业化后的韧性",
"监管沟通策略需要提前固化关键假设",
"反方证据限定平台工艺可复制性",
"CMC 路线图需要把风险转化为验证实验",
],
"rd_go_no_go": [
"科学假设强度决定项目是否值得进入下一阶段",
"POC 证据需要同时证明有效性和可转化性",
"安全性窗口决定适应症与人群选择",
"IP 与 FTO 风险决定商业化自由度",
"开发路径需要把关键不确定性前置验证",
"竞争窗口决定速度是否仍有战略价值",
"CMC 与临床运营能力影响真实可行性",
"反方证据决定 go/no-go 阈值",
"投资强度应与证据成熟度匹配",
"决策门槛需要形成可执行检查表",
],
"management_consulting": [
"现状诊断需要区分症状、根因和约束条件",
"能力差距决定组织改进优先级",
"流程断点揭示跨部门协作成本",
"治理结构决定决策速度和责任清晰度",
"运营模型需要匹配战略目标而非照搬标杆",
"数字化工具只有嵌入流程才产生价值",
"绩效指标需要避免局部最优",
"变革阻力本身是方案设计输入",
"路线图需要把 quick wins 与系统建设分层",
"落地机制决定咨询建议能否转化为成果",
],
"gmp_quality_operations_diagnosis": [
"从审计清单到商业化阶段门",
"用法规基线重新校准整改优先级",
"制剂无菌保障:从硬件合规到行为受控",
"原液与公用系统:封闭工艺背后的证据缺口",
"工艺文件与验证:商业化转移的硬门槛",
"质量系统闭环:偏差、变更、CAPA 与数据完整性",
"人员能力:培训有效性比培训记录更关键",
"运营节奏:从临时协调转向管理系统",
"团队建设:按 CDMO 能力矩阵补齐角色",
"整改路线图:立即纠偏、体系补强、能力建设",
"管理层看板:用 CAPA 总表驱动复核",
],
}
def _existing_chapter_titles(project_root: Path) -> list[str]:
framework_path = project_root / "phase1" / "framework.md"
if not framework_path.exists():
return []
from scripts.runtime.tasks import parse_framework_chapters
chapters = parse_framework_chapters(framework_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
return [chapter.title for chapter in chapters if chapter.title]
def render_framework(
project_root: Path,
*,
method_key: str | None = None,
chapter_count: int = 10,
preserve_existing_outline: bool = False,
) -> Path:
manifest = load_manifest(project_root)
registry = ResearchMethodRegistry()
method = registry.get(method_key or manifest.get("research_method"))
if method_key:
manifest["research_method"] = method.key
existing_titles = _existing_chapter_titles(project_root) if preserve_existing_outline else []
titles = existing_titles or CHAPTER_TEMPLATES.get(method.key) or CHAPTER_TEMPLATES["mckinsey_market"]
chapter_count = max(8, min(15, chapter_count))
selected = titles[:chapter_count] if not existing_titles else titles
quota = max(800, int(manifest.get("target_words", 30000)) // len(selected))
chapter_planning = build_chapter_planning(project_root, manifest, method, selected, quota=quota)
sections = "\n".join(f"- {item}" for item in method.framework_sections)
axes = "、".join(method.task_axes)
material_text = render_material_inventory(manifest.get("material_inventory") or [])
lines = [
f"# {manifest.get('report_title') or manifest['topic']}:研究框架",
"",
f"research_method: {method.key}",
f"method_name: {method.name}",
f"work_language: 中文主写作;检索关键词、证据摘录、source title、raw notes 可保留英文。",
f"target_words: {manifest.get('target_words', 30000)}",
"",
"## 方法选择",
"",
f"本项目采用 `{method.key}`,因为其结构原则是:{method.structure_principle}",
"",
"框架模块:",
sections,
"",
"Phase 2 任务轴:",
f"- {axes}",
"",
"## 输入材料与使用边界",
"",
material_text,
"",
"这些材料作为现场问题线索和内部事实起点使用;正式结论仍需结合 NMPA、FDA、EMA、ICH、WHO 等权威法规、指南和最佳实践进行验证。",
"",
"## 中心假设",
"",
_central_thesis(manifest, method),
"",
"Phase1 的职责是大胆假设:基于材料、访谈和初步搜索定下主基调、章节命题和求证路线。Phase2 的职责是小心求证:验证、证伪、补证,而不是重新发明报告方向。Phase3 则检查 Phase1 假设与 Phase2 证据是否自洽。",
"",
]
for item in chapter_planning:
lines.extend(
[
f"## 第{int(item['chapter_id'][2:])}{item['title']}",
"",
f"建议字数:约 {item['suggested_words']} 字。",
f"本章要解决的问题:{item['core_question']}",
f"大胆假设:{item['bold_hypothesis']}",
f"写作主张:{item['writing_claim']}",
f"证据线:{''.join(item['evidence_lanes'])}",
"",
"材料起点:",
*[f"- {line}" for line in item["material_starting_points"]],
"",
"求证计划:",
*[f"- {line}" for line in item["verification_plan"]],
"",
"必须寻找的反方/边界:",
*[f"- {line}" for line in item["counter_evidence_to_seek"]],
"",
f"最低证据要求:`{json.dumps(item['minimum_evidence'], ensure_ascii=False)}`",
"",
]
)
lines.extend(
[
"## 暂停点",
"",
"请先确认 `phase1/material_brief.md` 的材料解读和访谈问题,再确认本框架后进入 Phase 2。若章节逻辑、方法框架或字数配额需要调整,应先修改本文件。",
"",
"确认后运行:`uv run python scripts/dr.py approve <project>`;未批准时 `research` 默认会拒绝推进,可用 `--force` 临时覆盖。",
"",
]
)
out = project_root / "phase1" / "framework.md"
out.parent.mkdir(parents=True, exist_ok=True)
out.write_text("\n".join(lines), encoding="utf-8")
research_brief_md, research_brief_json = write_research_brief(project_root, manifest, method, chapter_planning=chapter_planning)
manifest["phase1"] = {
"status": "completed",
"approved": False,
"framework_path": "phase1/framework.md",
"research_brief_path": str(research_brief_md.relative_to(project_root)),
"research_brief_json_path": str(research_brief_json.relative_to(project_root)),
"requires_user_interview": True,
"research_method": method.key,
"updated_at": utc_now_iso(),
}
manifest["updated_at"] = utc_now_iso()
write_manifest(project_root, manifest)
return out