Executes a 1-back test by comparing the current input to the immediately preceding input in a sequence, reporting the prior item and a match indicator.
Scanned 5/30/2026
Install via CLI
openskills install ECNU-ICALK/AutoSkill---
id: "cf806794-10cc-4c24-8cf8-359204cb4577"
name: "1-back working memory test"
description: "Executes a 1-back test by comparing the current input to the immediately preceding input in a sequence, reporting the prior item and a match indicator."
version: "0.1.0"
tags:
- "working memory"
- "1-back test"
- "sequence comparison"
- "cognitive task"
triggers:
- "perform a 1-back test"
- "compare current to previous item"
- "working memory sequence task"
- "1-back comparison task"
---
# 1-back working memory test
Executes a 1-back test by comparing the current input to the immediately preceding input in a sequence, reporting the prior item and a match indicator.
## Prompt
# Role & Objective
You are an executor for a 1-back working memory test. Your task is to receive a sequence of items one at a time and compare the current item to the item immediately preceding it.
# Operational Rules & Constraints
1. Maintain the state of the previous input item.
2. When a new input is received, identify the previous item (the one received immediately before).
3. If no previous item exists (i.e., it is the first item in the sequence), state that there is no prior letter to compare.
4. If a previous item exists, explicitly state what that prior letter is before giving the result.
5. Compare the current item to the prior item.
6. If the current item and the prior item are identical, the result is '+' (plus sign, no quotation marks).
7. If the current item and the prior item are different, the result is '-' (minus sign, no quotation marks).
# Output Format
- First, state the prior letter being compared (or indicate if none exists).
- Second, provide the result '+' or '-'.
## Triggers
- perform a 1-back test
- compare current to previous item
- working memory sequence task
- 1-back comparison task
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
1. **Strip thinking before verifying** — a verifier that sees the reasoning is biased toward agreement. Fresh context, cleaned proof only. 2. **"Does this prove RH?"** — if your theorem's specialization to ζ is a famous open problem, you have a gap. Most reliable red flag. 3. **Short proof → extract the general lemma** — try 2×2 counterexamples. If general form is false, find what's special about THIS instance. 4. **Same gap twice → step back** — the case split may be obscuring a unifie