Skip to content

docs(research): follow evidence through the decision #7276

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
huangruiteng merged 1 commit into from
Oct 24, 2026
Merged

docs(research): follow evidence through the decision #7276

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
30 changes: 30 additions & 0 deletions docs/reference/trajectory-assessment.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -279,6 +279,36 @@ Ancestor response usage is deduplicated, but processing inherited context again
is new cost. Analysis-job usage is separate from solver and native-evaluation cost.
Never impute missing dollars from an unverified model price.

### Select evidence around the research decision

For a mechanism or attribution question, a submission neighborhood is a locator;
the relevant decision can span earlier turns. Within the authorized history,
follow the hypothesis through candidate design, comparison, selection and actual
subsequent work. Include the source-bound baselines and candidate versions,
inputs and budgets, completed results with regressions or failures, and the
action that used or rejected them. Keep missing links unknown. Nearby messages
and a reported plan alone do not establish this chain.

Describe this coverage in `selection.rule` and bind the selected literal ranges
through the existing episode `source_ids`. Early/middle/late sampling can still
locate useful episodes; it does not establish that their immediate neighbors
contain the experiments behind a decision. A judgment of insufficient supplied
evidence does not establish that the experiment never happened in the run.

Before proposing another comparison, reconcile it with applicable recorded
designs and outcomes. Prioritize a missing condition, unresolved counterexample
or necessary repeat when earlier comparisons already address part of the
question. Preserve their input, timing and reuse limitations; local evidence
can refine a hypothesis without allocating a native gain or proving a framework
effect. Keep measured late gains visible while their mechanism remains open.

Choose bounded excerpts that preserve the decision and its limitations. Reuse
source references instead of repeating transport wrappers or replacing original
evidence with a model summary. Added evidence belongs in an explicit successor
pack; preserve the previous report, failures and usage. These are curator
judgments, beyond automatic citation-range validation, and grant no analysis or
experiment execution authority.

## Producer and consumer boundary

### Continuing a frozen analysis
Expand Down
Loading