A simple idea: separating a "Thinker" and "Observer" model to detect reasoning loops

Thank you very much for the thoughtful reply.

Your point about the conflict of interest when a system evaluates its own reasoning is exactly the intuition that initially motivated this idea. I had been thinking about it mainly at the architectural level (separating a generator and a monitoring component), but your example shows that a similar separation can also appear at the prompt-structure level.

The idea of explicitly separating reasoning and output into blocks is very interesting. I had not previously thought about how much prompt structure itself can influence whether reasoning and answering become entangled.

I will definitely take a look at flompt. The idea of decomposing prompts into semantic blocks and explicitly including a chain_of_thought block seems closely related to the reasoning separation I was thinking about.

Out of curiosity, have you observed cases where this structured prompt decomposition helps detect or reduce reasoning failures such as contradictions or circular reasoning?

Thanks again for sharing the project.