superlab 0.1.35 → 0.1.36

package/lib/i18n.cjs

@@ -471,6 +471,8 @@ const ZH_SKILL_FILES = {
 - 不要在没有文献范围包和最接近前作对照的情况下直接下 novelty 判断。
 - 不要在只做了一轮脑暴或一轮文献检索的情况下直接下 final recommendation。
 - 不要把 idea 工件本身当成唯一证据记录；两轮文献检索的查询、来源分桶和最终来源数必须同步记到 \`.lab/writing/idea-source-log.md\`。
+- 在 \`idea\` 阶段可以说大致怎么验证、最小实验是什么，但不要在这里冻结 sample size、招募方案、条件数、问卷设计或随机化 protocol。
+- human-subject experiment design 应该留到 \`/lab:spec\`，在那里再把招募、分组、测量和伦理细节写死。
 - 三个 meaningful points 每个都控制在一句直接的话里。
 - 在批准前，必须运行 \`.lab/.managed/scripts/validate_idea_artifact.py --idea <idea-artifact> --source-log .lab/writing/idea-source-log.md --workflow-config .lab/config/workflow.json\`。
 - rewrite-only 模式下不能更新 \`.lab/context/mission.md\`、\`.lab/context/decisions.md\` 或 \`.lab/context/open-questions.md\`。
@@ -2191,6 +2193,7 @@ ZH_CONTENT[path.join(".codex", "skills", "lab", "stages", "spec.md")] = `# \`/la
 - 把已批准的 idea 转成显式要求。
 - 把已批准的数据集与 benchmark 方案带进 change。
 - 保留 idea 阶段冻结下来的评估边界。
+- 如果已批准的 idea 包含 human-subject evaluation，就在这里把 rough evaluation sketch 具体化成明确的人类受试实验设计，不要把招募或 protocol 细节继续留空。
 - 尽可能把风险翻译成具体任务。
 - 任务粒度要足够小，便于 \`/lab:run\` 和 \`/lab:iterate\` 可预测执行。
 - 一个被批准的 idea 只对应一个 lab-native change 目录，不要分散。
@@ -2210,6 +2213,13 @@ ZH_CONTENT[path.join(".codex", "skills", "lab", "stages", "spec.md")] = `# \`/la
 - split verification
 - preprocessing
 - benchmark protocol
+- human-subject experiment design
+- participant recruitment
+- sample-size rationale
+- condition design
+- assignment or randomization protocol
+- measurement or survey plan
+- ethics、consent 和 debrief 方案（如适用）
 - artifact creation
 - validation run
 - evaluation normalization

package/package-assets/shared/skills/lab/SKILL.md

@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ Use this skill when the user invokes `/lab:*` or asks for the structured researc
 - Produce 2-3 candidate approaches with trade-offs before recommending one.
 - Critique the idea before converging on it.
 - Include a minimum viable experiment before approval.
+- Keep the experiment discussion rough at this stage: say who or what is evaluated, the likely validation route, and the main validity risk, but leave sample size, recruitment, condition count, and full protocol design to `/lab:spec`.
 - Keep an explicit approval gate before `/lab:spec`.
 - Write idea artifacts with the template in `.lab/.managed/templates/idea.md`.
 - Keep `.lab/writing/idea-source-log.md` as the source-backed search manifest for the two literature sweeps.
@@ -124,6 +125,7 @@ Use this skill when the user invokes `/lab:*` or asks for the structured researc
 - Read `.lab/context/mission.md`, `.lab/context/decisions.md`, `.lab/context/state.md`, `.lab/context/workflow-state.md`, and `.lab/context/data-decisions.md` before drafting the change.
 - Use `.lab/changes/<change-id>/` as the canonical lab change directory.
 - Convert the approved idea into lab change artifacts using `.lab/.managed/templates/proposal.md`, `.lab/.managed/templates/design.md`, `.lab/.managed/templates/spec.md`, and `.lab/.managed/templates/tasks.md`.
+- When the approved idea involves human-subject evaluation, use this stage to freeze the human-subject experiment design: participant recruitment, sample-size rationale, condition design, assignment, measurement, and ethics or debrief details.
 - Update `.lab/context/decisions.md` after freezing the spec, then refresh derived views.
 - Do not skip task definition.
 

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

@@ -138,6 +138,8 @@
 - Explain what current methods do, why they fall short, and roughly how the proposed idea would work in plain language.
 - Explain what problem the idea actually solves before describing tentative contributions.
 - Keep the evaluation sketch high-level: who or what is evaluated, what proxy or simulator is used if any, what outcome matters, and what the main validity risk is. Leave full protocol design to later stages.
+- Use the idea stage to say roughly how the idea would be validated and what the minimum viable experiment looks like, but do not freeze sample size, recruitment plan, condition count, questionnaire design, or randomization protocol here.
+- Human-subject experiment design belongs to `/lab:spec`, where recruitment, assignment, measurement, and ethics details can be made explicit.
 - Keep contributions tentative and high-level. The goal here is to explain what the paper might contribute, not to freeze paper-facing wording.
 - The three meaningful points should each fit in one direct sentence.
 - The final output must guide the user. Tell them what decision matters now, what information would sharpen the idea, and which `/lab` stage should come next.

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

@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
 - Convert the chosen idea into explicit requirements.
 - Carry the approved dataset package, source choices, and benchmark mix into the change.
 - Preserve evaluation boundaries from the idea stage.
+- If the approved idea includes human-subject evaluation, convert the rough evaluation sketch into an explicit human-subject experiment design instead of leaving recruitment or protocol details implicit.
 - Translate risks into concrete tasks when possible.
 - Make task granularity small enough that `/lab:run` and `/lab:iterate` can execute predictably.
 - Use one lab-native change directory per approved idea instead of scattering spec artifacts.
@@ -56,6 +57,13 @@
 - split verification
 - preprocessing
 - benchmark protocol
+- human-subject experiment design
+- participant recruitment
+- sample-size rationale
+- condition design
+- assignment or randomization protocol
+- measurement or survey plan
+- ethics, consent, and debrief plan when applicable
 - artifact creation
 - validation run
 - evaluation normalization

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "superlab",
-  "version": "0.1.35",
+  "version": "0.1.36",
   "description": "Strict /lab research workflow installer for Codex and Claude",
   "keywords": [
     "codex",