01
Hypothesis
Every complex purchase decision has the same problem: confirmation bias. You decide what you want and then look for evidence that confirms it. The question: does a framework that forces structured evaluation (weighted criteria, alternatives analysis, red-teaming your own decision) reduce the error?
The test case: a PC upgrade on a tight budget in the Brazilian market (DDR4 at end of life, the move to AM5, volatile prices).
02
Method
BSI v3.0: deep research + synthetic reasoning + a structured decision framework. Dual mode: the framework works as a plain Markdown document, no AI, or as a skill where agents do the research, trade-off analysis and red team.
Applied to the real case: an AM5 kit (Ryzen 5 7600 + DDR5 + B650). 6 alternatives, 8 weighted criteria and market timing.
03
Result
The framework produced a structured decision, with documented reasoning and a defined timing. The analysis showed DDR4 was out of the Brazilian market (no stock, inflated prices) and that waiting for a sales event was the optimal strategy.
However: the decision has not been executed yet. There is no way to measure whether it was objectively better than the alternative (buying right away). The framework is robust as a process, but the outcome depends on uncontrolled external variables.
04
What changed
BSI v3.0 exists as a working dual-mode skill, reusable for any complex purchase decision. Full validation depends on making the purchase and comparing afterwards. Status: awaiting execution.