Manuscript Results Curation

When the user asks for direct manuscript writing, edit the manuscript source directly rather than hiding the interpretation in a generator.

Step-by-step process

Step 1: Read the repository workflow contract

Read planning/Project_Execution_Flowchart.md first.

Step 2: Read the manuscript entrypoints

Review:

• writing/main.tex
• writing/result/result.tex
• generated result fragments when relevant

Step 3: Gather the supporting experiment artifacts

Use the concrete outputs that support the requested narrative, such as:

• metrics JSON
• predictions parquet
• subject-performance parquet
• existing run plots
• generated figure directories

Step 4: Create missing visual artifacts when needed

If the required table, plot, graph, or image does not exist, derive it from the underlying run data in a reproducible way.

Step 5: Edit the manuscript directly

Insert or update the LaTeX content directly in the manuscript source when the user wants hand-written manuscript text.

Step 6: Add detailed interpretation

For each new result element, explain:

• what the artifact shows
• which comparison matters
• what conclusion the reader should draw
• what caveat still matters

Step 7: Rebuild the manuscript

Rebuild with:

• cd writing && latexmk -pdf -interaction=nonstopmode -halt-on-error -outdir=out main.tex

Record the compile log path and whether the PDF was refreshed.

Step 8: Update repository docs if the manuscript contract changed

If new manuscript artifact types, figure paths, or result-writing rules were introduced, update planning/Project_Execution_Flowchart.md.

Rules

• Always read planning/Project_Execution_Flowchart.md first.
• Always ground manuscript claims in concrete experiment artifacts.
• Always provide detailed interpretation around new tables or figures.
• Always say whether a result supports the direction, exposes a setup issue, or remains inconclusive.
• Always rebuild the manuscript after direct result edits.
• Always record the compile log path and output PDF path.
• Prefer direct manuscript edits when the user explicitly asks for direct LaTeX writing.
• Never add visuals without explaining their significance.
• Never hide hand-written interpretation inside a generator when the user asked for direct edits.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Caption-only reporting: A caption is not enough; the manuscript needs an explicit explanation of what the result means.
• Unanchored claims: Conclusions must map back to actual run artifacts.
• Generated-text detours: If the user wants direct manuscript writing, do not move the interpretation into a code generator.
• Visual clutter without purpose: Every table or figure should answer a real comparison or question.
• Skipping the rebuild: LaTeX edits are not complete until the manuscript compiles and the output is checked.