A hierarchical taxonomy and step-by-step architecture for high-precision ChatGPT sessions.
Teleology first, constraints second.
A prompt is a build script for reasoning. Declare the desired artefact; parameterize the dialectic (Λ); bind constraints; stage the workflow; embed self-checks.
| Tier | Prompt Intent (𝚰) | Typical Deliverables | Primary Λ-Tactics |
|---|---|---|---|
| 𝚰₁ | Inform | Facts, definitions, citations | κ (audience precision), φ (tone neutrality) |
| 𝚰₂ | Analyze | IRAC memos, comparative tables | τ (format switch), δ (self-audit rubric) |
| 𝚰₃ | Create | Stories, pitch decks, white papers | γ (chunk by DAG), ε (contrast drafts) |
| 𝚰₄ | Transform | Rewrites, translations, code refactors | θ (Δ-prompts), κ (tool signals) |
| 𝚰₅ | Critique / Iterate | Peer reviews, redlines, meta-feedback | ζ (MWEs), ε (side-by-side deltas) |
Hierarchy rule: higher tiers (𝚰₃-𝚰₅) usually nest lower ones—e.g., creation often embeds analysis and information retrieval.
- α — Clarity of Objective
- β — Contextual Saturation
- γ — Structured Constraints & Style Guides
- δ — Domain-Specific Rigor
- ε — Iterative Mindset
- ζ — Self-Reflection & Meta-Queries
These strengths form the foundational layer; every advanced syntax element merely refines them.
κ₁ Layperson • κ₂ Exec • κ₃ Board/Investor • κ₄ Counsel • κ₅ Regulator • κ₆ Domain Expert • κ₇ Engineer • κ₈ PM • κ₉ Academic • κ₁₀ Sales • κ₁₁ Press • κ₁₂ Internal Memo
σ₀ Flash ≤50w • σ₁ Brief ≈150w • σ₂ Compact ≈400w • σ₃ Standard ≈800w • σ₄ Expanded 1.5–2 k • σ₅ Comprehensive ∞
τ₁ Bullets • τ₂ Numbered • τ₃ Outline • τ₄ IRAC • τ₅ Problem-Solution-Benefit • τ₆ Issue-Rule-Analysis-Conclusion • τ₇ FAQ • τ₈ Table • τ₉ Narrative • τ₁₀ Pseudocode • τ₁₁ Proof • τ₁₂ Slide Notes
φ₁ Neutral • φ₂ Concise-Exec • φ₃ Board-Room • φ₄ Academic • φ₅ Technical • φ₆ Persuasive • φ₇ Conversational • φ₈ Thought-Leadership • φ₉ Journalistic • φ₁₀ Legalistic • φ₁₁ Storytelling • φ₁₂ Critical
GOAL:
Λ: κ = σ = τ = φ = θ_spec = <0–1 speculation tolerance> λ =
CONSTRAINTS:
- style / vocabulary rules
- banned words [...]
- citation requirements
- tool directives (python_user_visible, image_gen, ...)
STAGES:
- outline → freeze
- section drafts (G_i)
- integrated polish
[SELF-CHECK]
- Claims cite primary authority? □
- Banned lexemes absent? □
- Equations annotated inline? □
Ordering principle: Teleology → Λ → Constraints → Stages → Self-Check. Each layer refines the search space for the assistant’s reasoning engine.
| Symbol | Technique | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| α | Teleology Declaration | Anchor the end-state. |
| β | Λ-Parameterization | Deterministic branching. |
| γ | Chunk by Dependency Graph | Prevent global rewrites. |
| δ | Evaluation Hooks | Enforce quality gates. |
| ε | Contrast Prompts | Surface trade-offs fast. |
| ζ | Minimal Working Examples | Style fidelity. |
| η | Certainty Tolerance | Control speculation. |
| θ | Δ-Prompts | Fine-grain revisions. |
| ι | Time-Box Explorations | Limit breadth, boost depth. |
| κ | Tool Signals | Route to proper execution channel. |
GOAL: one-page investor brief introducing ENI6MA
Λ: κ = κ₃ # Board / Investor σ = σ₂ # ~400 words τ = τ₅ # Problem–Solution–Benefit φ = φ₂ # Concise-Exec θ_spec = 0.2 # Low speculation
CONSTRAINTS:
- include TAM, SAM, SOM metrics
- cite 1 external market report
- banned words: "synergy", "milestone"
STAGES:
- outline → freeze
- draft each section
- polish & compress
[SELF-CHECK]
- Financial metrics present? □
- Report citation included? □
- ≤400 words total? □
- Draft 0 (outline)
- Freeze outline upon approval.
- Draft 1 (section fills) using Δ-prompts for edits.
- Self-Check executed automatically by assistant.
- Feedback → repeat Δ-cycle until acceptance.
If answers run long or short, set
The assistant scales detail logarithmically with λ.
Within 30 seconds you have a deterministic, reproducible path from prompt to polished artefact—no guesswork, no wasted iterations.
Below is a one-stop reference deck of every tuning knob mentioned so far, laid out as standalone markdown tables you can drop into any playbook or wiki.
| Symbol | Meaning | Table Ref. |
|---|---|---|
| κ | Audience | §2 |
| σ | Verbosity / Length | §3 |
| τ | Structural Format | §4 |
| φ | Tone / Voice | §5 |
| θ | Certainty Tolerance | §6 |
| λ | Verbosity Override | §7 |
| Code | Audience Archetype | Prior Knowledge | Example Artefacts |
|---|---|---|---|
| κ₁ | Layperson / End-User | Minimal | How-to guides, FAQs |
| κ₂ | Line-of-Business Executive | KPI-driven | Dashboards, ROI briefs |
| κ₃ | Board Director / Investor | Strategic & Fiscal | Investor updates, one-pagers |
| κ₄ | General Counsel / Attorney | Legal nuance | Bench memos, compliance notes |
| κ₅ | Regulator / Auditor | Statutory refs | FedRAMP responses, audit packets |
| κ₆ | Domain Expert (Cryptographer) | Graduate-level tech | Proof sketches, algorithm specs |
| κ₇ | Software Engineer | Code & APIs | Run-books, API docs |
| κ₈ | Product Manager | User & market view | PRDs, feature roadmaps |
| κ₉ | Academic Reviewer | Research methods | Journal abstracts, lit reviews |
| κ₁₀ | Marketing / Sales Lead | Value props | Pitch scripts, battle cards |
| κ₁₁ | Press / Analyst | Headline insights | Press releases, analyst briefs |
| κ₁₂ | Internal Memo Audience | Org context | Decision logs, policy drafts |
| Code | Target Length | Typical Uses |
|---|---|---|
| σ₀ | ≤ 50 words (Flash) | Taglines, tweets |
| σ₁ | ~150 words (Brief) | Elevator pitches, blurbs |
| σ₂ | ~400 words (Compact) | One-pagers, abstracts |
| σ₃ | ~800 words (Standard) | Blog posts, memos |
| σ₄ | 1.5–2 k words (Expanded) | White-paper sections, tutorials |
| σ₅ | Unlimited (Comprehensive) | Full reports, deep dives |
| Code | Structure | Best-Fit Scenarios |
|---|---|---|
| τ₁ | Bullet List | Quick scans, cheat sheets |
| τ₂ | Numbered Steps | Procedures, run-books |
| τ₃ | Hierarchical Outline (I-A-1) | Planning long docs |
| τ₄ | IRAC | Legal briefs |
| τ₅ | Problem–Solution–Benefit | Sales copy, proposals |
| τ₆ | Issue–Rule–Analysis–Conclusion | Rigorous legal/technical analysis |
| τ₇ | FAQ | Stakeholder question sets |
| τ₈ | Comparison Table | Feature/competitor matrices |
| τ₉ | Narrative Paragraphs | Case studies, storytelling |
| τ₁₀ | Pseudocode / Algorithm Blocks | Dev guidance |
| τ₁₁ | Proof Outline | Theorems, formal derivations |
| τ₁₂ | Slide-Deck Notes | Speaker cues for presentations |
| Code | Tone Label | Stylistic Markers |
|---|---|---|
| φ₁ | Neutral-Informative | Objective, citation-focused |
| φ₂ | Concise-Executive | KPI-first, short sentences |
| φ₃ | Board-Room Concise | Formal brevity, risk framing |
| φ₄ | Academic-Formal | Passive voice, references, hedging |
| φ₅ | Technical-Precise | Jargon OK, specs & metrics |
| φ₆ | Persuasive / Marketing | Benefit-led, CTAs |
| φ₇ | Conversational | 1st/2nd person, approachable |
| φ₈ | Thought-Leadership | Visionary, trend-spotting |
| φ₉ | Journalistic | AP-style, inverted pyramid |
| φ₁₀ | Legalistic | Statutes, disclaimers |
| φ₁₁ | Storytelling | Anecdotes, vivid imagery |
| φ₁₂ | Critical / Skeptical | Counterpoints, risk emphasis |
| θ_spec Value | Guidance to Model |
|---|---|
| 0.0 | Strict facts only |
| 0.25 | Low speculation; conservatively cite |
| 0.50 | Balanced facts & hypotheses |
| 0.75 | Exploratory; accept open questions |
| 1.0 | Blue-sky brainstorming welcome |
| λ Keyword | Expansion Factor | Practical Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| ultra-brief | ×0.5 on σ | Tagline-level condensation |
| brief | ×0.75 on σ | Executive summary |
| normal | ×1 (default σ) | Standard depth |
| expanded | ×1.5 on σ | Add detail & examples |
| exhaustive | ×2+ on σ | Comprehensive compendium |
| Symbol | Technique | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| α | Teleology Declaration | Anchor the end-state |
| β | Λ-Parameterization | Deterministic branching |
| γ | Chunk by Dependency Graph | Prevent global rewrites |
| δ | Evaluation Hooks / Self-Check | Enforce quality before delivery |
| ε | Contrast Prompts | Compare strategies side-by-side |
| ζ | Minimal Working Examples | Guarantee style fidelity |
| η | Certainty Tolerance (θ_spec) | Control speculative depth |
| θ | Δ-Prompts | Pin-pointed revisions |
| ι | Time-Box Explorations | Limit breadth, sharpen focus |
| κ | Tool Signals (python_user_visible, etc.) | Route to correct execution channel |
| Λ Param | Choose From | Typical Command |
|---|---|---|
| κ | κ₁ … κ₁₂ | κ = κ₆ |
| σ | σ₀ … σ₅ | σ = σ₂ |
| τ | τ₁ … τ₁₂ | τ = τ₆ |
| φ | φ₁ … φ₁₂ | φ = φ₅ |
| θ | 0.0 – 1.0 | θ_spec = 0.25 |
| λ | keyword | λ = expanded |
Copy any row into your prompt block, adjust values, and the assistant will follow the specified branch with surgical precision.
(Copy → tweak → run)
GOAL: formal proof outline establishing NP-hardness of the Rosario–Wang exponential-search problem.
Λ:
κ = κ₉ # Academic Reviewer
σ = σ₄ # 1.5–2 k words
τ = τ₁₁ # Proof Outline
φ = φ₄ # Academic-Formal
θ_spec = 0.25 # Low speculation
λ = normal
CONSTRAINTS:
- define every symbol on first use
- cite ≥3 peer-reviewed PQC papers
- banned words: “trivial”, “obvious”
STAGES:
1) outline → freeze
2) expand each lemma section
3) integrate & polish
[SELF-CHECK]
1. All lemmas internally referenced? □
2. Citations use IEEE format? □
3. ≤2 000 words total? □
GOAL: numbered lesson plan teaching RSA fundamentals to Grade-12 students.
Λ:
κ = κ₁ # Layperson / Student
σ = σ₃ # ~800 words
τ = τ₂ # Numbered Steps
φ = φ₇ # Conversational
θ_spec = 0.5 # Balanced facts & examples
λ = brief
CONSTRAINTS:
- include one hands-on activity
- analogies must avoid advanced math
- provide key-takeaway bullet list at end
GOAL: FAQ explaining zero-knowledge proofs for a non-technical audience.
Λ:
κ = κ₁ # Layperson
σ = σ₂ # ~400 words
τ = τ₇ # FAQ
φ = φ₁ # Neutral-Informative
θ_spec = 0.3 # Mostly factual
CONSTRAINTS:
- 8–10 Q&A pairs
- each answer ≤40 words
- avoid the term “cryptographically robust”
GOAL: 500-word journalistic overview of recent NIST PQC standardization debates.
Λ:
κ = κ₁₁ # Press / Analyst
σ = σ₂ # ~400–500 words
τ = τ₉ # Narrative Paragraphs
φ = φ₉ # Journalistic
θ_spec = 0.4 # Allow moderate context guesses
λ = normal
CONSTRAINTS:
- inverted-pyramid structure
- quote at least one subject-matter expert
- cite publication dates (MM-DD-YYYY) for all sources
GOAL: 400-word memo outlining three strategic options for ENI6MA’s Q4 market expansion.
Λ:
κ = κ₂ # Line-of-Business Executive
σ = σ₂ # ~400 words
τ = τ₅ # Problem–Solution–Benefit
φ = φ₂ # Concise-Executive
θ_spec = 0.2 # Low speculation
λ = concise
CONSTRAINTS:
- include one KPI per option
- closing recommendation ≤50 words
- banned words: “synergy”, “boil the ocean”
- Paste the relevant block into ChatGPT.
- Edit the placeholders or constraints.
- Run — the model follows the Λ path and self-checks quality before delivery.