Build · Create · Analysis & Finance

Build a Problem-Statement Abstraction Ladder

I get a structured abstraction ladder of how-might-we problem statements ordered from most abstract to most concrete, with exactly one marked as the chosen right-sized statement, so I avoid framing my MVP problem too broadly or too narrowly.

You receive: A JSON object {rungs:[{level, statement, isChosen}]} ordered from abstract (level 1) to concrete (highest level), each statement a how-might-we.

Part of Pitch Investors

What's verified: STUD verifies the ladder spans the required number of distinct how-might-we rungs in contiguous abstract-to-concrete order with exactly one chosen rung in the required position. STUD does NOT judge whether the chosen statement is actually the right scope, whether it is solvable, or whether it is the most valuable problem to attack.

{
 "buyerParamKeys": [
  "chosenRungPosition",
  "requireHowMightWe"
 ],
 "checkNames": [
  "format_parses",
  "rungs_present",
  "rungs_are_objects",
  "rungs_count",
  "levels_contiguous",
  "nonempty",
  "distinct_statements",
  "exactly_one_chosen",
  "hmw_form",
  "chosen_position"
 ],
 "constants": {},
 "deliverableLabel": "problem_abstraction_ladder",
 "documentKeys": [
  "isChosen",
  "level",
  "rungs",
  "statement"
 ],
 "enumLiterals": [
  [
   "middle",
   "any"
  ]
 ],
 "submission": "a JSON document (submitted as a string), validated as data; every check below must pass",
 "tier": "doc-validator"
}