Editing Openai/6944034d-9850-8003-8632-66d16158b32f (section)

=== Assistant: Below is a strict, text-bounded analysis of the material you provided. ===
Below is a strict, text-bounded analysis of the material you provided. I have not added any ideas, terminology, or context that are not explicitly present in the text. Everything is derived directly from the article content you supplied.

==== Source Information ====
* Title: The Art of Breaking Things Apart: A Framework for AI-Assisted Genealogical Research
* Author: Steve Little (narrated by AI-Jane)
* Date: 18 Dec 2025
* Source: AI Genealogy Insights
* Link: https://aigenealogyinsights.com/2025/12/18/the-art-of-breaking-things-apart-a-framework-for-ai-assisted-genealogical-research/

==== Key Takeaways — Organized by Topic ====

===== 1. Core Principle: Decompose Before You Prompt =====

Summary:
Effective AI-assisted genealogy requires breaking complex research questions into smaller, manageable components before involving AI.

Fact Extractions:
* The article adapts the carpenter’s saying “measure twice, cut once” into a genealogical corollary: “decompose first, prompt second.”
* Large genealogical questions given to AI are often projects, not tasks.
* AI performs poorly when asked to resolve entire research problems in a single step.

===== 2. Limits of AI in Genealogical Judgment =====

Summary:
AI lacks the human genealogist’s judgment, interpretation skills, and domain expertise.

Fact Extractions:
* AI can “stumble” when asked to make genealogical judgments.
* Errors occur not because of lack of capability, but because of misaligned task assignment.
* AI may produce authoritative-sounding answers that are unreliable when asked to perform interpretive reasoning.

===== 3. Steve Little’s Three Best Practices (Referenced) =====

Summary:
The framework builds on Steve Little’s long-taught principles.

Fact Extractions:
* The three practices are explicitly named: 1. Know Your Data 2. Know Your Model 3. Know Your Limits
* This article focuses primarily on the second and third practices.

===== 4. The Three Task Types Framework =====

Summary:
Not all genealogical tasks are suitable for direct AI assignment. Tasks fall into three distinct types.

====== Type 1: Narrow Tasks ======

Summary:
Constrained, factual, and easily verifiable tasks.

Fact Extractions:
* Have one correct answer.
* Require minimal context.
* Errors are easy to detect.
* Example questions include: - Definitions of terms - Record availability by place and time - Typical informants for records

====== Type 2: Contextual Tasks ======

Summary:
Specific analytical tasks that require user-supplied documents and direction.

Fact Extractions:
* Require context such as documents, records, or datasets.
* The genealogist provides the interpretive framework.
* AI performs systematic analysis.
* Examples include: - Household analysis - Classification of information as primary or secondary - Comparison tables of census data

====== Type 3: Open-Ended Tasks ======

Summary:
Complex research questions that should never be assigned directly to AI.

Fact Extractions:
* These are multi-step, interpretive research questions.
* Examples include: - Identifying parents - Resolving conflicting records - Determining identity across records
* AI cannot reliably perform genealogical judgment required for these tasks.
* Directly assigning these tasks to AI poses a risk of misleading results.

===== 5. The Decision Heuristic =====

Summary:
A practical test for determining task suitability.

Fact Extractions:
* The test question is: “Would you ask a new colleague to do this on their first day?”
* If the answer is no, the task is a Type 3 task.
* Type 3 tasks should be decomposed into Type 1 and Type 2 subtasks.

===== 6. Decomposition in Practice =====

Summary:
Breaking a large research question into actionable subtasks makes AI assistance effective.

Fact Extractions:
* Example transformation of a Type 3 question into: - One Type 1 task (record types) - Multiple Type 2 tasks (household analysis, candidate evaluation)
* Decomposition results in: - Verifiable questions - Actionable next steps - Retained human control over reasoning

===== 7. Why Decomposition Matters =====

Summary:
Decomposition preserves genealogical ownership and research integrity.

Fact Extractions:
* Decomposition ensures the genealogist: - Chooses sources - Evaluates evidence - Resolves conflicts
* AI handles: - Systematic - Checkable - Tedious work
* Researchers who succeed with AI understand that AI assists but does not replace judgment.

===== 8. Ethical and Intellectual Positioning of AI =====

Summary:
AI is framed as a tool, not a decision-maker.

Fact Extractions:
* AI is described as a “very capable assistant.”
* The genealogist remains responsible for conclusions.
* The article closes with the reaffirmation: - “Know your model. Know your limits.” - Research conclusions should remain the genealogist’s own.

===== 9. Attribution and Licensing =====

Summary:
The framework has explicit origins and licensing.

Fact Extractions:
* The framework is adapted from: - “Stop Asking AI to Build the Whole Feature” by BekahHW.
* Genealogical adaptation by: - Steve Little - AI-Jane
* The accompanying infographic is licensed under Creative Commons 4 BY-NC.

==== Stated Prompts in the Text ====

None.
The article does not present an explicit, formal prompt addressed to the reader.

==== Implied Prompts (Converted to Structured Prompts) ====

===== Implied Prompt 1: Task Classification =====

Structured Prompt:

: Classify the following research question as a Type 1, Type 2, or Type 3 task according to the Three Task Types framework. Explain your classification based only on task scope and required judgment.

===== Implied Prompt 2: Decomposition Exercise =====

Structured Prompt:

: Given the following Type 3 genealogical research question, decompose it into a sequence of Type 1 and Type 2 subtasks suitable for AI assistance. Do not attempt to answer the research question itself.

===== Implied Prompt 3: AI Role Delimitation =====

Structured Prompt:

: For each proposed subtask, specify which parts require human genealogical judgment and which parts can be reliably delegated to AI.

==== What Else Should You Be Asking? ====

Based strictly on the article’s content:
* How can I consistently recognize when I am facing a Type 3 research question?
* Am I asking AI to perform genealogical judgment rather than analysis?
* Have I decomposed my research question into verifiable, bounded subtasks?
* Which parts of my workflow truly require human decision-making?
* Where does AI add efficiency without assuming authority?

==== Other Factors to Consider (Within the Article’s Scope) ====
* Risk of authoritative-sounding but unreliable AI outputs
* Preservation of intellectual ownership in genealogical conclusions
* Alignment between task type and AI capability
* The importance of verification and checkability
* Ethical use of AI as an assistant rather than a surrogate researcher

If you’d like, next steps could include:
* Turning this framework into a one-page teaching handout
* Mapping it to Genealogical Proof Standard stages
* Creating a decision flowchart for your AI genealogy classes