research-architect-draft

Research Architect Draft

Use this branch after the upstream research-construction artifacts exist.

Blocking inputs

Draft only when these files or compatible equivalents are available:

paper_output/confirmed_research_spine.md
paper_output/evidence_bank.md
paper_output/claim_register.md
paper_output/citation_support_bank.md
paper_output/evidence_display_map.md
paper_output/section_blueprints.md
paper_output/writing_rationale_matrix.md
paper_output/exemplar_adaptation_plan.md      # required when target references exist

Read figure_asset_map.md as the compatible specialized equivalent of evidence_display_map.md.

When evidence is incomplete, produce or update the research execution plan.

Required outputs

Create:

paper_output/section_blueprints.md
paper_output/writing_rationale_matrix.md
paper_output/first_draft/main.md
paper_output/final_artifact_manifest.md

Optional when useful:

paper_output/first_draft/main.tex

Draft architecture

Choose a structure that fits the selected design family, research spine, target-paper functions, and evidence mode. Supported architectures include:

• hypothesis-led quantitative article;
• causal or explanatory evaluation;
• qualitative thematic or interpretive article;
• grounded or process-model article;
• single-case or comparative-case article;
• historical or archival argument;
• mixed-methods article;
• conceptual, critical, normative, or theory-building article;
• policy analysis;
• systematic, scoping, or integrative review;
• computational, experimental, or design/build/evaluation article.

The target paper supplies functional lessons. Its exact headings, section proportions, display sequence, and rhetoric transfer only when they fit the user's independent inquiry.

Drafting rules

• The title and abstract compress the confirmed research spine and inference boundary.
• The introduction moves through significance, prior knowledge, unresolved tension, research question, and contribution in the form appropriate to the design family.
• Theory appears in the role declared by the spine and exemplar analysis.
• Methods, sources, or argumentative procedures include enough detail to evaluate the warrant.
• Findings follow the claim-support sequence rather than the chronology of the research process.
• Quantitative results report effect size, uncertainty, and design limits when applicable.
• Qualitative findings preserve context, evidence excerpts, alternative interpretations, and the relationship between data and themes.
• Case and historical findings make chronology, source provenance, and rival explanations visible.
• Mixed-method findings identify integration points and meta-inferences.
• Conceptual and normative arguments expose premises, steps, counterarguments, and applicability limits.
• Discussion distinguishes evidence, interpretation, transfer, and speculation.
• Every central claim maps to evidence IDs, citation IDs, or explicit limitation language.
• Citation support and exemplar learning remain separate.
• Unverified sources remain visibly marked.

Writing rationale matrix

Use:

| Row ID | Manuscript Unit | Planned Function | Research-Spine Link | Reference-Logic Principle Applied | Project-Specific Adaptation | Evidence or Citation Anchor | Planned Text Move | Claim Boundary | Final Check | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Write the matrix before or during drafting. Each reference-derived move should identify its research function and project-specific adaptation.

Output behavior

The first draft may remain rough while retaining logical completeness. Mark uncertain claims with TODO_VERIFY, missing evidence with TODO_EVIDENCE, adaptation decisions with TODO_ADAPT, and citation gaps with TODO_CITATION.