results-report

Results Report

Write the complete post-experiment summary report after analysis artifacts are ready.

This skill is for the stage after results-analysis.

Role boundary

results-analysis does

• strict statistics,
• real figures,
• figure interpretation scaffolding,
• stats appendix.

results-report does

• complete experiment wrap-up report,
• decision-oriented narrative,
• figure-by-figure interpretation inside a coherent structure,
• limitations, failure cases, and next actions,
• Obsidian write-back into Results/Reports/.

When the task is to create or redesign paper-ready figures/tables themselves, rely on publication-chart-skill instead of expanding results-report into figure/table production.

Do not replace strict analysis with confident prose. If the analysis bundle is missing, first identify the blocker and request or produce the missing bundle.

Hard gate: do not write a complete report when analysis-report.md, stats-appendix.md, figure-catalog.md, provenance, or the primary comparison question is missing. In that case, write only a blocker summary and route back to results-analysis.

Default output

The default report is an internal research report, not manuscript prose.

It should be named as:

YYYY-MM-DD--{experiment-line}--r{round}--{purpose}.md

Example:

• 2026-03-18--freezing--r03--transfer-summary.md
• 2026-03-18--contrastive-adversarial--r02--ablation-report.md

The note title should be:

{Experiment Line} / Round {N} / {Purpose} / {YYYY-MM-DD}

Read references/report-naming.md before finalizing the filename or note title.

Required frontmatter

---
type: results-report
date: 2026-03-18
experiment_line: freezing
round: 3
purpose: transfer-summary
status: active
source_artifacts:
  - analysis-output/analysis-report.md
  - analysis-output/stats-appendix.md
linked_experiments:
  - Experiments/Freezing-Study.md
linked_results:
  - Results/Freezing-vs-Adapter.md
---

Default report structure

The report must include all sections below.

1. Executive Summary
2. Experiment Identity and Decision Context
3. Setup and Evaluation Protocol
4. Main Findings
5. Statistical Validation
6. Figure-by-Figure Interpretation
7. Failure Cases / Negative Results / Limitations
8. What Changed Our Belief
9. Next Actions
10. Artifact and Reproducibility Index

Read references/report-structure.md before writing.

Workflow

1. Confirm the report object

Lock these fields first:

• date,
• experiment line,
• round,
• purpose,
• linked experiment note,
• linked durable result note if one already exists.

If round is unknown, do not silently invent a semantic round. Use r00 only as a temporary placeholder and state that it should be normalized later.

2. Read the strict analysis bundle

Minimum required inputs:

• analysis-report.md
• stats-appendix.md
• figure-catalog.md
• actual figures, if available

If these are missing, either generate them first with results-analysis or explicitly state which claims cannot be supported. Do not turn loose CSV/Markdown artifacts into a polished report unless the strict analysis bundle has already validated unit of analysis, primary metric, and claim wording.

3. Write the report as a decision object

This report is not a transcript of outputs.

Each section must answer a real question:

• What did we test?
• What changed numerically?
• What is actually supported?
• What failed or remains uncertain?
• What should we do next?

Read references/decision-oriented-analysis.md for the expected reasoning depth.

4. Interpret figures inside the report

Do not only attach figures.

For each main figure:

• introduce why it is included,
• state the key observation,
• explain the supported interpretation,
• explain the decision implication.

Read references/figure-interpretation.md and references/statistical-completeness.md as needed.

5. Choose the write target explicitly

If the current repo is bound to an Obsidian project knowledge base:

• create or update Results/Reports/{report-name}.md,
• link back to the relevant Experiments/ note,
• update the matching canonical Results/ note when a durable conclusion is now supported,
• append a short trace to today's Daily/ note,
• update .claude/project-memory/<project_id>.md.

If the repo is not bound:

• write the report as a local markdown artifact in the requested output location or next to the analysis bundle,
• keep the same filename contract,
• explicitly say that no Obsidian write-back was attempted.

Use obsidian-project-kb-core conventions only for bound repos. Internal experiment reports belong in Results/Reports/, not Writing/.

6. End with explicit next actions

The report must end with operational decisions, for example:

• stop a weak branch,
• schedule one missing ablation,
• promote a stable finding into manuscript-facing writing,
• update the active plan.

Required quality bar

• The report must be dateable, searchable, and attributable to one experiment line and one round.
• The report must cite actual evidence from the analysis bundle.
• The report must include negative results when they matter.
• The report must separate stable conclusion from tentative interpretation.
• The report must say what changed in project belief and what should happen next.
• The report must preserve Claim Candidate wording and must not promote speculative or observed claims into decisive conclusions.

Reference files

Load only what is needed:

• references/report-structure.md
• references/report-naming.md
• references/figure-interpretation.md
• references/statistical-completeness.md
• references/decision-oriented-analysis.md
• references/EVIDENCE-PROPAGATION.md
• examples/example-results-report.md