Skip to content

evidence-first.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
103 lines (81 loc) · 3.19 KB

evidence-first.md

File metadata and controls

103 lines (81 loc) · 3.19 KB

Evidence-First Note Writing

Use this guide when the goal is to approach the quality of a hand-written research note rather than a template-filled summary.

Core Rule

Do not write the finished note directly from:

  • the title
  • the abstract
  • one or two extracted snippets
  • fixed headings alone

Instead, use a three-stage model-first pipeline:

  1. build an evidence bundle
  2. make a dynamic internal note plan around that evidence
  3. let the model write the note from the evidence and plan

Evidence Bundle

The bundle should answer:

  • what type of paper this is
  • which parts of the PDF were actually found
  • which numbers matter
  • which datasets, metrics, baselines, or cohorts matter
  • which figures are method figures, data figures, and result figures
  • which conclusions are about scale, transfer, cost, limitations, or practical value

In DeepPaperNote, use:

  • scripts/run_pipeline.py
  • scripts/build_synthesis_bundle.py

Explicit Note Plan

Before drafting the final note, the agent should create an explicit short planning artifact rather than silently "thinking it through" and jumping straight to the final Markdown.

Do not require or expose a long free-form chain-of-thought block such as <thinking>...</thinking>. Instead, require a compact and inspectable planning block such as <note_plan>...</note_plan> or an equivalent temporary planning file.

The plan should state:

  • which sections this paper actually deserves
  • which sections need more technical depth
  • which subsections deserve ### headings
  • which evidence feeds each section
  • which 3 to 6 numbers matter most
  • which comparisons are the real ones
  • whether this is mostly a method note, system note, dataset note, benchmark note, or empirical/clinical note
  • whether key formulas or complexity expressions need to appear in the final note

Good note plans often add paper-specific sections such as:

  • ### 数据构建
  • ### 量表代理特征抽取
  • ### 训练细节
  • ### 关键洞察
  • ### 为什么结果不等于临床可用

Recommended shape:

<note_plan>
paper_type: ...
dominant_domain: ...
must_cover:
- ...
key_numbers:
- ...
real_comparisons:
- ...
section_plan:
- section: 方法主线
  weight: high
  subsections:
  - ...
  evidence_sources:
  - ...
</note_plan>

The plan should be short, structured, and directly useful for the final draft.

Writing Layer

Only after the evidence bundle and explicit note plan exist should the model draft the final note.

Good final notes should:

  • prioritize numbers and comparisons over generic summary sentences
  • add paper-specific subsections when the evidence supports them
  • avoid abstract-only rewriting
  • explain why a figure or table matters, not just attach it
  • separate “作者声称了什么” from “论文真正证明了什么”
  • explain the mechanism deeply enough that an engineer could re-explain or re-implement the main flow

Minimum Quality Bar

If the note does not clearly contain:

  • the most important numbers
  • the most important comparison
  • one paper-specific insight
  • one honest limitation
  • one technically detailed subsection
  • and, when necessary, one key formula or formal expression

then the note is still too close to a template summary.