Parallel-Voice Proposer

Problem

Single-pass generation collapses whatever internal tension the model has into a confident-sounding mean, and downstream consumers see only the polished result. Running multiple completions in sequence under different personas slows the loop and depends fragilely on role-ordering effects. Best-of-N needs an external reward model to pick the winner, and for many tasks no such scorer exists. The team is forced to choose between cheap-but-overconfident, slow-and-ordered, or expensive-and-needs-a-judge.

Solution

Prompt the model to produce two or three candidate next-thoughts in one completion, each prefixed with a voice tag such as `[voice: world-model]`, `[voice: critic]`, `[voice: prediction]`. Then ask for a single `selected: <voice>` line with a one-sentence reason. The canonical thought enters the main stream; the losers are appended to a proposer-losers log for inspection. Voices that never win across a rolling window become eligible for retirement; that retirement decision is explicit, not silent.

When to use

• Single-pass generation produces overconfident output that hides real disagreement.
• Inner-committee's sequential roles are too slow per tick.
• An external reward model for best-of-N is not available.