spb/autoscholar

1---23mode: empirical4discipline: interdisciplinary5title: "<Working title of the study>"6---78# Research brief — <working title>910This file is the complete brief for one autonomous AutoScholar research run. Write it for a careful researcher who has never heard of the platform: everything they would need to know to carry out the study is here. Replace every <placeholder>.1112## 1. Research objective and scope1314- **Question.** <One precise question, phrased so that it can be answered negatively.>15- **Why it matters.** <Two or three sentences on the scientific or practical stake.>16- **Scope.** <What is in and out: population, period, geography, model class, text corpus…>17- **Non-goals.** <What the study deliberately does not attempt.>1819## 2. Domain, mode and methodology2021- **Discipline(s):** <economics | finance | mathematics | computer science | medicine | … >22- **Primary mode:** <empirical | computational | theoretical | review | experimental | humanities>23- **Secondary modes (optional):** <…>24- **Methodology.** <Name the method and why it fits the question: e.g., panel regression with two-way fixed effects; proof by induction with a counterexample search; PRISMA-style systematic review; benchmark with 5 seeds and ablations.>2526## 3. Proposed contribution and novelty assessment2728- **Contribution.** <What new knowledge should exist after the run.>29- **Novelty check.** <Which prior work to compare against; what would make the result "already known".> State novelty in qualified terms ("to our knowledge").3031## 4. Literature and source rules3233- Search at least <2–3> indexes (OpenAlex, Crossref, arXiv, Semantic Scholar, PubMed as fits the field). Target <10–30> verified sources.34- Cite only sources added through the platform's verification tool; prefer DOIs; read full texts where open access.35- Required reading: <list any must-cite references with DOI/arXiv id>.36- Record a claim-to-source map for every background claim used in the introduction and discussion.3738## 5. Evidence: data, simulations, proofs or texts3940- **Data sources (empirical):** <official APIs/repositories, exact tables/series, period, license>. Document provenance, license, download commands, hashes.41- **Simulation (if any):** <design, seeds, what it stands for>. Label synthetic output as synthetic.42- **Proof/formal objects (theoretical):** <definitions, assumptions, candidate propositions>.43- **Corpus (review/humanities):** <sources, editions, inclusion criteria>.4445## 6. Procedure46471. <Step-by-step protocol: cleaning, estimation/derivation/screening, outputs.>482. <Pre-registered specifications or proof obligations to run first.>493. <Secondary analyses allowed only if labelled exploratory.>5051## 7. Baselines, robustness and falsification5253- **Baselines/alternatives:** <…>54- **Robustness:** <alternative specifications, samples, hyper-parameters, relaxed assumptions, counterexample search>.55- **What would falsify the claim:** <explicit conditions under which the paper must report a null or negative result>.5657## 8. Reproducibility and artifacts5859- All code under `code/` with a pinned environment and `code/reproduce.sh` regenerating `results/metrics.json`, tables and figures from raw inputs.60- All reported numbers registered with the platform's `record_reported_value` tool.61- Data manifest with licenses and SHA-256; experiment log with commands, seeds, exit codes.6263## 9. Manuscript structure and LaTeX standards6465- AutoScholar class (`\documentclass{autoscholar}`), natbib author-year, booktabs tables, vector figures.66- Sections: abstract (150–300 words), introduction, related work, method/theory, data (if any), results, robustness, discussion incl. competing explanations, limitations, conclusion, references, appendices (proofs, protocol, reproducibility).67- Target length: <8–20 pages>; depth over length.6869## 10. Critical review, revision and quality expectations7071- The independent reviewer should focus on: <identification/validity threats, proof gaps, screening bias, …>.72- Revise substantively; document a point-by-point response.73- Hard requirements: verified citations, traceable numbers, honest limitations, clean build.7475## 11. Limitations, ethics and legal constraints7677- <Known limitations the paper must state.>78- <Ethical/legal constraints: no human-subject work, data licenses, no copyrighted full-text republication.>7980## 12. Acceptance criteria8182The run is successful only if: <concrete, checkable criteria — e.g., "the main specification and two robustness checks are estimated on the full sample; the paper reports effect sizes with confidence intervals; the proof of Proposition 1 is complete and checked symbolically; at least 15 verified sources are cited">.83