5.5 KiB
This document contains deferred and exploratory UX ideas retained for historical reference. Items are not commitments, priorities or active tasks unless they are reintroduced through a future experiment.
Original source path: docs/backlog info.md (split by Experiment 31)
Confidence Engine UI Roadmap
The reasoning engine has reached a point where the next priority is not adding more capability, but improving the experience of using what already exists. The goal is to make the investigation feel coherent, understandable and satisfying while keeping the underlying reasoning visible enough for development without exposing unnecessary complexity to end users.
Phase 1 – Complete the Core Investigation Experience
1. Investigation History
Finish the investigation history so it reads like an investigation notebook rather than a chat log.
Each completed question should record:
- The question asked
- The user's answer
- The resulting understanding (optional where appropriate)
Example:
✓ Were both figures measured over the same period?
Answer
Yes. Both covered the same quarter.
Outcome
The figures can now be compared directly.
This should become the permanent chronological record of the investigation.
2. Current Understanding
Replace "What we've established" with something closer to:
Current understanding Confidence so far
The purpose is to show how uncertainty is reducing over time.
Example:
Current understanding
✓ Same reporting period confirmed
✓ Comparable baselines confirmed
• Complaint rate still requires investigation
This card should update cumulatively after every answer.
3. Current Investigation
This becomes the primary focus of the interface.
Keep it deliberately simple.
Current investigation
Question
...
Why this matters
...
Nothing more.
The user should always understand:
- what they're answering
- why it matters
4. Loading Experience
Replace generic loading messages with investigation-specific feedback.
Examples:
Reviewing your answer...
Checking what changes...
Updating our understanding...
Choosing the next question...
Avoid fake progress bars or percentages.
Phase 2 – UX Polish
Animated progression
Instead of updating the page instantly:
Answer submitted
↓
History updates
↓
Current understanding updates
↓
Next investigation appears
Small animations should reinforce the feeling of progressing through an investigation.
Progressive completion
Completed investigation steps should gradually become:
✓ Same reporting period
✓ Comparable baselines
✓ Complaint rate
► Reporting consistency
Collapsible history
Once the investigation becomes long:
Investigation history (8)
▼
Allow older questions to collapse.
Better ending states
Avoid generic messages such as:
No further questions.
Instead distinguish between outcomes.
For example:
Current evidence has taken us as far as it can.
Further investigation requires additional evidence.
or
The investigation is complete.
Current confidence is sufficient to make a decision.
Different endings communicate different reasoning outcomes.
Phase 3 – Developer Experience
Developer Details are becoming crowded.
Split them into logical sections:
Developer Details
Overview
Graph
Diagnostics
Raw JSON
Mock Data
This keeps debugging information available without overwhelming the interface.
Phase 4 – Mock Scenario Library
Before returning to reasoning refinement, build a richer set of mock scenarios.
These allow UI work to continue independently of the reasoning engine.
Existing
- Happy path
- Complete investigation
- Error state
- No question available
Required
Contradiction
Two observations conflict.
Example:
Observation A
Observation B
↓
Contradiction detected
↓
Question
Comparison
Compare two options.
Examples:
- House A vs House B
- Product A vs Product B
Definition
Clarify an ambiguous term.
Example:
"What do you mean by..."
Diagnosis
Fault finding and troubleshooting.
Prioritisation
Several competing options requiring selection.
Revision
Support changing an earlier answer.
Example:
Q1
A1
Q2
A2
User edits A1
↓
Reasoning rebuilds
Even if replay isn't implemented yet, mock the behaviour.
Long investigation
10–15 question investigation.
Used for:
- scrolling
- collapsing history
- pacing
Slow provider
Simulate very slow model responses (30–60 seconds).
Used for refining loading behaviour.
Provider error
Connection failure.
Malformed provider response
Invalid or partial JSON.
Useful for resilience testing.
Backlog
Reasoning Replay
Create a replay mode for completed investigations.
Example:
Statement
↓
Question 1
↓
Answer
↓
Graph updates
↓
Question 2
↓
Answer
↓
Graph updates
↓
...
Uses include:
- demonstrations
- debugging
- explaining the reasoning process
- validating graph updates
This reinforces the principle:
The graph remembers. The conversation explains.
Deliberately Out of Scope
The following should wait until repeated real-world testing reveals genuine reasoning issues:
- Reasoning algorithms
- Graph architecture
- Confidence calculation
- Decomposition improvements
- Reasoning pattern expansion
- Investigation strategy changes
The current focus is making the investigation experience clear, understandable and enjoyable before expanding the reasoning engine further.