Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From thinking-frameworks-skills
Synthesizes information from multiple sources into coherent insights and applies analogical reasoning to transfer knowledge across domains. Useful for literature reviews, stakeholder feedback, and creative problem-solving.
npx claudepluginhub lyndonkl/claude --plugin thinking-frameworks-skillsHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/thinking-frameworks-skills:synthesis-and-analogyThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- [Workflow](#workflow)
Routes analogical reasoning to the right sub-skill: boundary-testing, domain-transfer, perspective-shifting, or structure-mapping. Use for finding comparisons, importing solutions, or testing analogies.
Orchestrates a 5-step synoptic cycle for panoramic synthesis across 3+ domains, producing integrated understanding rather than sequential compromise. Use for multi-domain problems, conflicting expert perspectives, or architectural decisions affecting multiple stakeholders.
Synthesizes qualitative research via affinity mapping, thematic analysis, pattern recognition, and insight extraction. Use for interview analysis, usability findings, and actionable recommendations.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Synthesis & Analogy Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Clarify goal and gather sources/domains
- [ ] Step 2: Choose approach (synthesis, analogy, or both)
- [ ] Step 3: Apply synthesis or analogy techniques
- [ ] Step 4: Test quality and validity
- [ ] Step 5: Refine and deliver insights
Step 1: Clarify goal
For synthesis: What sources? What question are we answering? What conflicts need resolving? For analogy: What's source domain (familiar)? What's target domain (explaining)? What's goal (explain, solve, ideate)? See Common Patterns for typical goals.
Step 2: Choose approach
Synthesis only → Use Synthesis Techniques. Analogy only → Use Analogy Techniques. Both → Start with synthesis to find patterns, then use analogy to explain or transfer. For straightforward cases → Use resources/template.md. For complex multi-domain synthesis → Study resources/methodology.md.
Step 3: Apply techniques
For synthesis: Identify themes across sources, note agreements/disagreements, resolve conflicts via higher-level framework, extract patterns. For analogy: Map structure from source to target (what corresponds to what?), identify shared relationships (not surface features), test mapping validity. See Synthesis Techniques and Analogy Techniques.
Step 4: Test quality
Self-assess using resources/evaluators/rubric_synthesis_and_analogy.json. Synthesis checks: captures all sources? resolves conflicts? identifies patterns? adds insight? Analogy checks: structure preserved? deep not surface? limitations acknowledged? helps understanding? Minimum standard: Score ≥3.5 average.
Step 5: Refine and deliver
Create synthesis-and-analogy.md with: synthesis summary (themes, agreements, conflicts, patterns, new insights) OR analogy explanation (source domain, target domain, mapping table, what transfers, limitations), supporting evidence from sources, actionable implications.
Thematic Synthesis (identify recurring themes):
Conflict Resolution Synthesis (reconcile disagreements):
Pattern Identification (find cross-cutting insights):
Example: Synthesizing 10 postmortems → Pattern: 80% of incidents involve config change + lack of rollback plan. Outliers: 2 incidents hardware failure. Meta-insight: Need config change review process + automatic rollback capability.
Structural Mapping Theory:
Surface vs Deep Analogies:
Example - Surface: "Brain is like computer (both process information)" - too vague, doesn't help Example - Deep: "Brain neurons are like computer transistors: neurons fire/don't fire (binary), connect in networks, learning = strengthening connections (weights). BUT neurons are analog/probabilistic, computer precise/deterministic" - preserves structure, acknowledges limits
Analogy Quality Tests:
Pattern 1: Literature Review Synthesis
Pattern 2: Multi-Stakeholder Synthesis
Pattern 3: Explanatory Analogy
Pattern 4: Cross-Domain Problem-Solving
Pattern 5: Creative Ideation via Analogy
Synthesis Quality:
Analogy Quality:
Avoid:
Inputs Required:
For synthesis:
For analogy:
Techniques to Use:
Synthesis:
Analogy:
Outputs Produced:
synthesis-and-analogy.md with:
Resources:
Minimum Quality Standard: