You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Deal or no deal, the UK visual effects sector is facing almost certain loss of mid to long-term competitiveness under the high costs and red tape of visa proposals post-Brexit.

“London’s position as a European powerhouse is at risk,” warned Framestore CEO and co-founder William Sargent. “We are a centre of excellence but if barriers are erected then other clusters in other cities will emerge.”

Antony Hunt, CEO of the Cinesite Group, said, “We will always benefit from highly-skilled overseas artists with the knowledge they bring and share. It’s vital the UK’s post-Brexit visa policy takes this into account, so we can remain globally successful. If the government gets this wrong, it wouldn’t take long for our hard-won VFX work to drift away to other countries where the labour costs are less prohibitive.”

The VFX and animation industry is particularly sensitive to changes in immigration policy with a third of the 6,000 artists employed at UK houses from the EU or European Economic Area (excluding UK and Ireland) and 13% from the rest of the world.

Framestore, which did VFX work on two of the films nominated for the best visual effects Oscar (Avengers: Infinity War and Christopher Robin, and whose art department worked on Ready Player One), employs over 1,000 staff in London, including 300 representing every member state.

While recruitment is not expected to fall off a cliff after March 29, a ‘no deal’ scenario “creates difficult and potentially impossible obligations on employers when checking documentation for the right to work,” according to trade body UK Screen Alliance, as EU passports are not stamped on entry to the UK.

However, it is the proposed new skilled worker visa, due to be introduced January 2021, that remains the major cause of concern for VFX companies.

“The costs are expected to be severe,” said Neil Hatton, CEO of the UK Screen Alliance. “While there will be no quota restrictions, it is clear the lever of control on migration will be the visa cost and the salary threshold.”

A five-year skilled worker visa – the preferred route for companies wanting to retain and develop promising – could cost around £9,000 ($11,500), but the cost to the company of running the bureaucracy of visa compliance is even higher.

“It will place a considerable burden on HR and recruitment departments who will need more staff,” Hatton said. “This is also a barrier for smaller companies that may not be able to afford the overhead. If the visa application process is outsourced [to a lawyer], it can cost £2,500 [$3,200] per visa.”

With a third of current EU workers in VFX on permanent contracts and therefore likely to stay (as Settled Status citizens), UK Screen Alliance estimates at least 500 Skilled Worker Visas will be required every year, adding up to £4.5m ($5.8m) in costs across the sector (more if the initial application is for two years then renewed for three). This is because the proposed minimum salary threshold of £30,000 ($38,000) is considered too high. Currently, 7% of the VFX and animation workforce hired from the EU are paid less than this.

“To increase salary levels above £30,000 would cause significant wage inflation as it would need to be offered to all workers at that level and not just those from the EU and would also erode the differentials with pay grade that are immediately above,” Hatton said.

UK Screen estimates this could add 3-5% on payroll costs, “seriously impacting competitiveness.”

The Alliance is lobbying the UK government to reduce the minimum threshold to £20,000 ($26,000) or, failing that, link the threshold to appropriate rates defined for Shortage Occupation List roles identified as compositor, animator and technical director among others.

“Ensuring any system is not solely based on salary requirements or skills will be key for our sector,” said Hunt. “The UK has a skills shortage generally before you build in the Brexit scenario so there is a real risk to our sector.”

Can the UK maintain its dominance of the sector?

While investment by UK facilities is on hold amid the uncertainty, few believe the industry will come to a juddering halt on April 1st. The government has promised a year-long consultation around some contentious elements of the visa and the industry is hoping it will show a greater flexibility toward the creative industries.

Neither does the sector appear to have experienced a reduction in demand for its services. This reflects recent BFI figures that show the UK’s high-end television and film production benefitted from a spend of £3.1bn ($4bn) last year.

Total VFX spend in 2016 was £510.7m ($655m) generating £1bn ($1.3bn) in GVA for the UK economy and supporting 17,940 direct and indirect jobs, per UK Screen Alliance.

”It took us [as an industry] 25 years to get where we are and if we start to dilute it, it will make our life harder and it will not be easy to maintain our dominance of the sector in Europe,” said Sargent.