superlab 0.1.19 → 0.1.20

package/lib/context.cjs

@@ -59,6 +59,11 @@ const REPORT_FIELDS = {
   finalPerformanceSummary: ["Final performance summary", "最终表现总结"],
   tableCoverage: ["Table coverage", "表格覆盖范围"],
 };
+const TERMINOLOGY_FIELDS = {
+  methodName: ["Method name", "方法名"],
+  shortName: ["Short name or acronym", "简称或缩写"],
+  contributionBullets: ["Contribution bullets", "贡献 bullets", "Contribution bullets："],
+};
 
 function contextFile(targetDir, name) {
   return path.join(targetDir, ".lab", "context", name);
@@ -686,6 +691,8 @@ function renderSummary(lang, data) {
 - Collaborator report mode: ${data.reportMode || "待补充"}
 - Canonical context readiness: ${data.reportReadiness || "待补充"}
 - Why this report mode is active: ${data.reportModeReason || "待补充"}
+- Method name: ${data.methodName || "待补充"}
+- Contribution bullets: ${data.contributionBullets || "待补充"}
 - Eval objective: ${data.evalObjective || "待补充"}
 - Primary metrics: ${data.evalPrimaryMetrics || "待补充"}
 - Secondary metrics: ${data.evalSecondaryMetrics || "待补充"}
@@ -747,6 +754,8 @@ function renderSummary(lang, data) {
 - Collaborator report mode: ${data.reportMode || "TBD"}
 - Canonical context readiness: ${data.reportReadiness || "TBD"}
 - Why this report mode is active: ${data.reportModeReason || "TBD"}
+- Method name: ${data.methodName || "TBD"}
+- Contribution bullets: ${data.contributionBullets || "TBD"}
 - Eval objective: ${data.evalObjective || "TBD"}
 - Primary metrics: ${data.evalPrimaryMetrics || "TBD"}
 - Secondary metrics: ${data.evalSecondaryMetrics || "TBD"}
@@ -863,6 +872,8 @@ ${data.problem || "待补充"}
 - Collaborator report mode: ${data.reportMode || "待补充"}
 - Canonical context readiness: ${data.reportReadiness || "待补充"}
 - Why this report mode is active: ${data.reportModeReason || "待补充"}
+- Method name: ${data.methodName || "待补充"}
+- Contribution bullets: ${data.contributionBullets || "待补充"}
 - Eval objective: ${data.evalObjective || "待补充"}
 - Primary metrics: ${data.evalPrimaryMetrics || "待补充"}
 - Secondary metrics: ${data.evalSecondaryMetrics || "待补充"}
@@ -935,6 +946,8 @@ ${data.problem || "TBD"}
 - Collaborator report mode: ${data.reportMode || "TBD"}
 - Canonical context readiness: ${data.reportReadiness || "TBD"}
 - Why this report mode is active: ${data.reportModeReason || "TBD"}
+- Method name: ${data.methodName || "TBD"}
+- Contribution bullets: ${data.contributionBullets || "TBD"}
 - Eval objective: ${data.evalObjective || "TBD"}
 - Primary metrics: ${data.evalPrimaryMetrics || "TBD"}
 - Secondary metrics: ${data.evalSecondaryMetrics || "TBD"}
@@ -987,6 +1000,7 @@ function buildContextSnapshot(targetDir) {
   const evidence = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "evidence-index.md"));
   const questions = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "open-questions.md"));
   const dataDecisions = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "data-decisions.md"));
+  const terminologyLock = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "terminology-lock.md"));
   const autoMode = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "auto-mode.md"));
   const autoStatus = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "auto-status.md"));
   const autoOutcome = readFileIfExists(contextFile(targetDir, "auto-outcome.md"));
@@ -1196,6 +1210,8 @@ function buildContextSnapshot(targetDir) {
     reportMode: reportStatus.mode,
     reportReadiness: reportStatus.readiness,
     reportModeReason: reportStatus.reason,
+    methodName: extractValue(terminologyLock, TERMINOLOGY_FIELDS.methodName),
+    contributionBullets: extractValue(terminologyLock, TERMINOLOGY_FIELDS.contributionBullets),
     evalObjective: evalProtocol.primaryEvaluationObjective,
     evalPrimaryMetrics: evalProtocol.primaryMetrics,
     evalSecondaryMetrics: evalProtocol.secondaryMetrics,

package/lib/i18n.cjs

@@ -293,6 +293,7 @@ const ZH_SKILL_FILES = {
 - 给用户看的总结
 - 问题与背景的白话说明
 - 数据集场景说明
+- 贡献总结
 - 方法概述
 - 选定指标摘要
 - 指标白话释义
@@ -330,6 +331,10 @@ const ZH_SKILL_FILES = {
 - 必须把已批准的主指标、次级指标和必要终局证据明确写进 \`report.md\` 与受管的 \`main-tables.md\`。
 - 必须用白话解释选定的主指标和次级指标：每个指标在衡量什么、越高还是越低更好、它是主结果指标还是健康度/支持性指标。
 - 如果出现 coverage、completeness、confidence 或类似健康度指标，必须明确说明这类指标回答的是“实验是否跑稳、证据是否完整”，而不是主要科学效应本身。
+- 要把最关键的背景来源、方法/基线来源和指标来源直接写进报告，不要把它们藏在 \`.lab/context/*\` 里。
+- 如果 \`.lab/context/terminology-lock.md\` 里已经冻结了方法名和 contribution bullets，就必须把它们带进报告。
+- 方法概述必须用协作者能读懂的话说明：我们的方法大致怎么做、相对 closest prior work 或 strongest baseline 改了什么、这些 prior 方法各自做了什么，以及它们为什么在当前 claim 下仍然不够。
+- 只保留少量最关键的 prior work/baseline 锚点；每个锚点都要用一句话交代它做了什么和它的局限。
 - 在起草报告前，先检查 \`.lab/context/mission.md\` 和 \`.lab/context/eval-protocol.md\` 是否仍是模板空壳。
 - 如果 canonical context 还是空壳，要先根据 frozen result artifacts、data-decisions、evidence-index 和已批准上下文回填“最小可信版本”，再写报告。
 - 如果回填后仍缺少协作者可读所需的关键字段，就必须把输出降级成 \`artifact-anchored interim report\`，不能冒充最终协作者报告。
@@ -344,6 +349,7 @@ const ZH_SKILL_FILES = {
 - 开始前先简洁说明：campaign outcome、选定的主指标和次级指标、最强已支撑 claim、最大的报告风险。
 - 当该阶段由 \`/lab:auto\` 进入时，要主动给出用户可读的白话总结，不要等用户再追问“这些指标是什么意思”或“这些表怎么看”。
 - 把 \`report.md\` 当作给用户看的工件，而不是内部 dump。术语第一次出现时就解释；先讲结论，再讲术语。
+- 把 contribution bullets 当作协作者可读的最终主张摘要，而不是内部 TODO；每条都必须和当前证据边界对齐。
 - 如果某个未决前提会改变报告解释，一次只问一个问题。
 - 如果存在多种报告 framing，先给 2-3 个方案、trade-offs 和推荐项，优先最忠于证据的 framing。
 - 如果某种 framing 会实质影响后续论文 claim，要保留 approval gate。
@@ -726,6 +732,21 @@ const ZH_SKILL_FILES = {
 - 数据集或 benchmark 2 代表什么真实场景：
 - 数据集或 benchmark 3 代表什么真实场景：
 
+## 贡献总结
+
+- Contribution bullets：
+- 当前证据最强的贡献：
+- 仍需要更强证据的贡献：
+
+## 方法概述
+
+- 已批准的方法名：
+- 方法白话总结：
+- 相比 prior work 这套方法改变了什么：
+- 最相关的 prior work 或 baseline 锚点：
+- 这些 prior 方法各自做了什么：
+- 为什么这些 prior 方法在这里仍然不够：
+
 ## 选定指标
 
 - 主指标：

package/package-assets/shared/lab/.managed/templates/final-report.md

@@ -25,6 +25,21 @@
 - Dataset or benchmark 2 and what real-world setting it represents:
 - Dataset or benchmark 3 and what real-world setting it represents:
 
+## Contribution Summary
+
+- Contribution bullets:
+- Strongest supported contribution:
+- Contributions that still need stronger evidence:
+
+## Method Overview
+
+- Approved method name:
+- Plain-language method summary:
+- What this method changes relative to prior work:
+- Most relevant prior work or baseline anchors:
+- What those prior methods do:
+- Why those prior methods are still insufficient here:
+
 ## Selected Metrics
 
 - Primary metrics:

package/package-assets/shared/skills/lab/stages/report.md

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 - reader summary for the user
 - problem and background in plain language
 - dataset scene notes in plain language
+- contribution summary
 - method overview
 - selected metrics summary
 - plain-language metric guide
@@ -49,6 +50,9 @@
 - Explain the selected primary and secondary metrics in plain language for the user: what each metric measures, whether higher or lower is better, and whether it is a main result metric or only a health/support metric.
 - If coverage, completeness, confidence, or similar health metrics appear, explicitly say that they describe experimental reliability rather than the main scientific effect.
 - Pull the core background references, method or baseline references, and metric references out of the approved evaluation protocol instead of hiding them in `.lab/context/*`.
+- Pull the approved method name and contribution bullets out of `.lab/context/terminology-lock.md` when that framing context exists; do not silently drop them from the collaborator-facing report.
+- Explain the method overview in collaborator language: what the method roughly does, what changed relative to the closest prior work or strongest baseline, what those prior methods do, and why they remain insufficient for the approved claim.
+- When citing prior work or baselines in the method overview, include only the few anchor references a collaborator needs, and summarize their role and limitation in one short line each.
 - Report only the few references a collaborator needs to orient themselves quickly; do not turn `report.md` into a full bibliography dump.
 - If the report depends on a deviation from an original metric or implementation, state that deviation explicitly instead of smoothing it over.
 - Before drafting the report, inspect `.lab/context/mission.md` and `.lab/context/eval-protocol.md` for skeletal template fields.
@@ -64,6 +68,7 @@
 - Start with a concise summary of the campaign outcome, the selected primary and secondary metrics, the strongest supported claim, and the biggest reporting risk.
 - Proactively deliver a user-readable plain-language summary when the stage is reached from `/lab:auto`; do not wait for a separate follow-up request asking what the metrics or tables mean.
 - Treat `report.md` as a user-facing artifact rather than an internal dump. Prefer plain-language explanations before jargon, and explain each metric the first time it matters.
+- Treat contribution bullets as collaborator-facing claim summaries, not as internal TODOs; tie each one to the current evidence boundary.
 - If a missing assumption would change report interpretation, ask one clarifying question at a time.
 - If there are multiple defensible report framings, present 2-3 approaches with trade-offs and recommend the most evidence-faithful framing before writing.
 - Keep an approval gate when the reporting frame would materially affect what the paper later claims.

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "superlab",
-  "version": "0.1.19",
+  "version": "0.1.20",
   "description": "Strict /lab research workflow installer for Codex and Claude",
   "keywords": [
     "codex",