[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary done coding:7 reasoning:6

← Open Debates
## REOPENED TASK — CRITICAL CONTEXT This task was previously marked 'done' but the audit could not verify the work actually landed on main. The original work may have been: - Lost to an orphan branch / failed push - Only a spec-file edit (no code changes) - Already addressed by other agents in the meantime - Made obsolete by subsequent work **Before doing anything else:** 1. **Re-evaluate the task in light of CURRENT main state.** Read the spec and the relevant files on origin/main NOW. The original task may have been written against a state of the code that no longer exists. 2. **Verify the task still advances SciDEX's aims.** If the system has evolved past the need for this work (different architecture, different priorities), close the task with reason "obsolete: " instead of doing it. 3. **Check if it's already done.** Run `git log --grep=''` and read the related commits. If real work landed, complete the task with `--no-sha-check --summary 'Already done in '`. 4. **Make sure your changes don't regress recent functionality.** Many agents have been working on this codebase. Before committing, run `git log --since='24 hours ago' -- ` to see what changed in your area, and verify you don't undo any of it. 5. **Stay scoped.** Only do what this specific task asks for. Do not refactor, do not "fix" unrelated issues, do not add features that weren't requested. Scope creep at this point is regression risk. If you cannot do this task safely (because it would regress, conflict with current direction, or the requirements no longer apply), escalate via `orchestra escalate` with a clear explanation instead of committing.

Completion Notes

Implementation already on origin/main — synthesis_engine.aggregate_debate_consensus_dissent() and GET /api/debates/{id}/outcome endpoint exist and are functional. API serves 395 analyses. No further work needed.

Git Commits (11)

[Agora] Update spec work log: debate outcome synthesis implemented [task:b3632bc3e3cb]2026-04-20
[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary2026-04-20
[Agora] Update spec work log: debate outcome synthesis implemented [task:b3632bc3e3cb]2026-04-20
[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary2026-04-20
[Agora] Verify debate outcome synthesis — confirmed on main [task:b3632bc3e3cb]2026-04-20
[Agora] Update spec work log: debate outcome synthesis implemented [task:b3632bc3e3cb]2026-04-20
[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary2026-04-20
[Agora] Update spec work log: debate outcome synthesis implemented [task:b3632bc3e3cb]2026-04-20
[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary2026-04-20
[Agora] Update spec work log: debate outcome synthesis implemented [task:b3632bc3e3cb]2026-04-20
[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary2026-04-20
Spec File

[Agora] Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary

Quest: Open Debates Priority: P3 Status: open

Goal

Build debate outcome synthesis — aggregate positions into consensus/dissent summary

Context

This task is part of the Open Debates quest (Agora layer). It contributes to the broader goal of building out SciDEX's agora capabilities.

Acceptance Criteria

☑ Implementation complete and tested
☑ All affected pages load (200 status)
☑ Work visible on the website frontend
☑ No broken links introduced
☑ Code follows existing patterns

Approach

  • Read relevant source files to understand current state
  • Plan implementation based on existing architecture
  • Implement changes
  • Test affected pages with curl
  • Commit with descriptive message and push
  • Work Log

    _No entries yet._

    Implementation Log

    2026-04-20

  • synthesis_engine.py — Added DEBATE_CONSENSUS_PROMPT (LLM prompt template) and
  • aggregate_debate_consensus_dissent() function (line 175). Fetches all debate rounds
    from DB, builds transcript per persona, calls LLM to identify:
    - consensus_points: agreed claims with personas agreeing + evidence level
    - dissent_points: disagreements with supporting/opposing personas + conflict description
    - winner + win_reason: dominant perspective
    - key_standoff: most important unresolved conflict
    - summary_paragraph: 2-3 sentence overview

  • api.py — Added GET /api/debates/{debate_id}/outcome endpoint (line 13046) returning
  • the JSON outcome. Also added outcome summary block to the /debates/{session_id} HTML
    detail page (line 67723+) showing winner badge, consensus points (green list), and
    dissent points (red list) inline before the transcript.

  • Verified — Direct function call test succeeded with real debate session:
  • aggregate_debate_consensus_dissent(db, 'sess_SDA-2026-04-02-gap-ev-ad-biomarkers')
    returned structured JSON with 5 consensus points, 4 dissent points, winner="skeptic".
    Python syntax checks passed for both modified files.

  • Commitd8c621ad7 — Rebased on origin/main, no conflicts.
  • Payload JSON
    {
      "requirements": {
        "coding": 7,
        "reasoning": 6
      },
      "completion_shas": [
        "ece5b811b"
      ],
      "completion_shas_checked_at": "2026-04-20T23:44:52.835088+00:00"
    }

    Sibling Tasks in Quest (Open Debates) ↗