infinite-agents-public/infinite_variants/infinite_variant_4/WEB_RESEARCH_INTEGRATION.md

Web Research Integration: ReAct Pattern

Research Source

URL: https://www.promptingguide.ai/techniques/react Topic: ReAct (Reasoning and Acting) pattern for multi-agent systems Date Researched: 2025-10-10

Key Concepts Extracted

1. Interleaved Reasoning and Acting

From Source:

ReAct generates "reasoning traces" and "task-specific actions" in an interconnected manner, allowing LLMs to "induce, track, and update action plans" while enabling interaction with external information sources.

Applied In This Variant:

• Every quality evaluation begins with explicit reasoning (THOUGHT phase)
• Actions (evaluations, rankings) are informed by prior reasoning
• Observations from actions feed back into next reasoning cycle
• Quality assessment and iteration generation are interleaved, not sequential

Evidence in Implementation:

• .claude/commands/infinite-quality.md: Structured THOUGHT → ACTION → OBSERVATION phases
• .claude/commands/evaluate.md: "THOUGHT Phase: Reasoning About Evaluation" before scoring
• .claude/commands/rank.md: "THOUGHT Phase: Reasoning About Ranking" before analysis
• All commands document reasoning before executing actions

2. Thought-Action-Observation Loop

From Source:

The core loop cycles: Thought (generates reasoning strategy) → Action (interfaces with tools) → Observation (captures results) → [repeat]

Applied In This Variant:

THOUGHT Phase:

• Analyze specification quality criteria
• Reason about evaluation strategy
• Plan quality-driven creative directions
• Consider what constitutes quality in this context

ACTION Phase:

• Execute evaluations using defined criteria
• Generate iterations with quality targets
• Score across multiple dimensions
• Rank and segment iterations

OBSERVATION Phase:

• Analyze evaluation results
• Identify quality patterns and trade-offs
• Extract actionable insights
• Inform next wave strategy

Evidence in Implementation:

• README.md: Complete workflow section documenting T-A-O cycles
• CLAUDE.md: "ReAct Pattern Integration" section with cycle details
• evaluators/: Each evaluator has THOUGHT, ACTION, OBSERVATION phases
• Infinite mode: Each wave uses observations from previous wave to inform next reasoning

3. Reducing Hallucination Through External Grounding

From Source:

ReAct reduces fact hallucination by grounding in external information and supports switching between reasoning approaches.

Applied In This Variant:

• Evaluations grounded in concrete evidence from code
• Every score requires specific examples (lines of code, features, patterns)
• Quality standards externalized in specs/quality_standards.md
• Evaluation criteria in separate evaluators/ files (external knowledge)
• Reasoning must cite specific evidence, not make unsupported claims

Evidence in Implementation:

• evaluators/technical_quality.md: "Evidence to look for" sections with concrete examples
• evaluators/creativity_score.md: Requires specific creative elements as evidence
• evaluators/spec_compliance.md: Checklist-based approach with binary evidence
• All evaluation outputs include "evidence" field with specific line numbers and examples

4. Adaptive and Contextual Problem-Solving

From Source:

Creates a "synergy between 'acting' and 'reasoning'" that allows more adaptive and contextually informed problem-solving.

Applied In This Variant:

• Quality evaluation adapts based on spec context
• Infinite mode strategy evolves based on observations
• Evaluation criteria can be customized (scoring weights)
• System learns what quality means from top performers

Evidence in Implementation:

• config/scoring_weights.json: Configurable weights for different contexts
• Alternative profiles (technical-focus, creative-focus, etc.) adapt to needs
• Infinite mode adapts strategy based on wave observations
• Quality reports include "Recommendations for Next Wave" informed by current results

5. Few-Shot Exemplars and Reasoning Trajectories

From Source:

Use few-shot exemplars demonstrating reasoning trajectories and design flexible prompts adaptable to different task types.

Applied In This Variant:

• specs/example_spec.md: Provides example quality criteria and success patterns
• templates/quality_report.md: Template showing reasoning structure
• evaluators/: Each includes calibration examples showing reasoning → score
• README.md: Multiple scoring examples with reasoning demonstrated

Evidence in Implementation:

• Calibration examples in each evaluator showing reasoning process
• Report template shows how to reason about patterns
• Example spec demonstrates how to think about quality
• Documentation includes "Success Examples" and "Example Use Cases"

ReAct Pattern Implementation Summary

Core Pattern: THOUGHT → ACTION → OBSERVATION

This variant embeds ReAct at three levels:

1. Command Level (.claude/commands/*.md):

• Each command has explicit THOUGHT, ACTION, OBSERVATION phases
• Reasoning precedes execution
• Results inform next actions

2. Wave Level (Infinite mode):

• Wave N observations inform Wave N+1 thoughts
• Strategy adapts based on quality trends
• Continuous improvement through feedback loops

3. Evaluation Level (Individual assessments):

• Pre-evaluation reasoning about criteria
• Systematic application of standards
• Post-evaluation analysis and reflection

Synergy Between Reasoning and Acting

Traditional Approach (Without ReAct):

Generate iterations → Evaluate → Report
(Linear, no reasoning, no adaptation)

ReAct-Enhanced Approach (This Variant):

THOUGHT: Reason about quality goals and strategy
  ↓
ACTION: Generate with quality targets
  ↓
OBSERVATION: Evaluate and analyze patterns
  ↓
THOUGHT: Learn from observations, adapt strategy
  ↓
ACTION: Generate next wave with refinements
  ↓
[Continuous loop...]

Specific Implementations Inspired by ReAct

1. Explicit Reasoning Documentation

ReAct Principle: Make reasoning visible and trackable

Implementation:

• All evaluations include "reasoning" field
• Quality reports have "Strategic Insights" section with reasoning
• Rankings explain why certain iterations rank higher
• Every score is justified with evidence

Files:

• All command files in .claude/commands/
• All evaluator files in evaluators/
• Template in templates/quality_report.md

2. Iterative Strategy Refinement

ReAct Principle: Update action plans based on observations

Implementation:

• Infinite mode uses wave observations to plan next wave
• Quality gaps identified in rankings inform creative directions
• Success factors from top performers guide strategy
• Recommendations section provides actionable next steps

Files:

• .claude/commands/infinite-quality.md: Phase 4 "Reasoning About Results"
• .claude/commands/rank.md: "Recommendations for Next Wave" section
• .claude/commands/quality-report.md: "Strategic Recommendations" phase

3. Multi-Path Reasoning

ReAct Principle: Support switching between reasoning approaches

Implementation:

• Three parallel evaluation dimensions (technical, creative, compliance)
• Each dimension has different reasoning approach
• Trade-off analysis recognizes competing quality criteria
• Alternative scoring profiles for different contexts

Files:

• evaluators/technical_quality.md: Evidence-based technical reasoning
• evaluators/creativity_score.md: Aesthetic and innovation reasoning
• evaluators/spec_compliance.md: Checklist-based compliance reasoning
• config/scoring_weights.json: Multiple reasoning profiles

4. External Knowledge Grounding

ReAct Principle: Ground reasoning in external information

Implementation:

• Evaluation criteria externalized in separate files
• Quality standards documented and referenceable
• Specific code examples required for all scores
• Spec compliance checked against external specification

Files:

• specs/quality_standards.md: External quality knowledge base
• evaluators/*.md: Formalized evaluation knowledge
• All evaluations require evidence from actual iteration code

5. Observable Feedback Loops

ReAct Principle: Observation captures results to inform reasoning

Implementation:

• Every evaluation produces structured observations (JSON)
• Rankings aggregate observations across iterations
• Quality reports synthesize observations into insights
• Insights feed back into next wave planning

Files:

• Output structure: quality_reports/evaluations/*.json
• Output structure: quality_reports/rankings/*.md
• Output structure: quality_reports/reports/*.md

Comparison: Before vs After ReAct Integration

Without ReAct (Hypothetical Basic Variant)

1. Generate 10 iterations
2. Score each iteration (no reasoning shown)
3. Rank by score
4. Report: "Top iteration: X with score Y"

Problems:

• No reasoning transparency
• No adaptation between iterations
• No learning from results
• Opaque scoring process

With ReAct (This Variant)

1. THOUGHT: Analyze spec, reason about quality criteria
2. ACTION: Generate iterations with quality targets
3. OBSERVATION: Evaluate with documented reasoning
   - Technical reasoning: "Code is clean because..."
   - Creative reasoning: "This is original because..."
   - Compliance reasoning: "Requirements met: ✓ X, ✓ Y, ✗ Z"
4. THOUGHT: Analyze patterns in results
   - "Top iterations succeed because of pattern P"
   - "Low scores caused by factor F"
5. ACTION: Generate next wave incorporating lessons
6. [Loop continues with adaptive improvement]

Benefits:

• Complete reasoning transparency
• Adaptive strategy improvement
• Learning from observations
• Evidence-based scoring

Key Innovation: ReAct for Quality Assessment

The primary innovation of this variant is applying ReAct to quality evaluation, not just generation:

Traditional AI Evaluation:

• "This iteration scores 75/100"
• No reasoning shown
• Opaque process

ReAct-Enhanced Evaluation:

THOUGHT: What makes code quality excellent?
- Clean structure, good comments, DRY principle...

ACTION: Examine iteration code
- Line 45-67: Excellent validation with clear errors [Evidence]
- Line 120-135: Some code duplication [Evidence]

OBSERVATION: Score 20/25 on code quality
Reasoning: Strong fundamentals with minor DRY violations
Evidence: Specific line examples provided above

Impact on Strategy: Extract validation pattern from this iteration,
apply to future iterations while addressing duplication

This makes quality assessment:

• Transparent: Reasoning is documented
• Fair: Consistent criteria applied
• Actionable: Insights drive improvement
• Adaptive: Learns and evolves

Validation: Does This Implementation Follow ReAct?

Checklist from Source:

✅ Interleaved reasoning and acting: Yes - THOUGHT and ACTION phases alternate ✅ Thought-Action-Observation loop: Yes - All commands follow this structure ✅ Induces and updates action plans: Yes - Strategy adapts based on observations ✅ Grounds in external information: Yes - Evaluations cite specific evidence ✅ Reduces hallucination: Yes - Every claim requires concrete evidence ✅ Supports switching reasoning approaches: Yes - Multiple evaluation dimensions ✅ Few-shot exemplars: Yes - Examples and calibration throughout ✅ Improves interpretability: Yes - All reasoning documented

Conclusion: This variant successfully implements the ReAct pattern for quality evaluation and continuous improvement.

Learning Applied vs Learning Demonstrated

What We Learned from URL:

1. ReAct interleaves reasoning and acting
2. T-A-O loop structure
3. External grounding reduces hallucination
4. Adaptive, contextual problem-solving
5. Few-shot reasoning trajectories

How We Applied It:

1. ✅ Every command has THOUGHT-ACTION-OBSERVATION phases
2. ✅ Infinite mode implements continuous T-A-O loops across waves
3. ✅ All evaluations require specific code evidence, no unsupported claims
4. ✅ Strategy adapts based on wave observations, scoring configurable by context
5. ✅ Examples and calibration throughout documentation

Evidence of Application:

• Structure of all command files
• Evaluator reasoning requirements
• Infinite mode adaptive strategy
• Quality report insights feeding next wave
• Evidence-based scoring throughout

---

Conclusion: This variant successfully integrates ReAct pattern principles to create a quality evaluation system that reasons explicitly, acts systematically, observes carefully, and adapts continuously. The web research directly informed the architecture and implementation of all major components.