coulomb-research/workplans/CR-WP-0003-paper-zero-v0-1-manuscript.md

id	type	title	domain	repo	status	owner	topic_slug	created	updated	quality_dod	quality_dod_at	quality_dod_by	quality_dod_note	origin	origin_ref	state_hub_workstream_id
CR-WP-0003	workplan	M1: CR-000 Paper Zero v0.1 manuscript	communication	coulomb-research	finished	codex	coulomb-social	2026-09-28	2026-09-29	DoD-Ok	2026-09-29	codex	v0.1 manuscript coherent, all [MISSING] sections replaced, self-criticism recorded and claims updated accordingly; independent criticism and graph prototype handed off to CR-WP-0004 (M2) as residuals rather than claimed here.	residual	CR-WP-0002	2e0fa669-8410-5a4f-a422-fb6b8797768a

M1: CR-000 Paper Zero v0.1 manuscript

Implement M1 of seed/CoulombResearchMilestonePlan.md: bring the CR-000 skeleton created under CR-WP-0002 (M0) to a coherent v0.1 internal- circulation manuscript. CR-WP-0002 established the empty structure (outline with all sections marked [MISSING]/[CONJECTURE], five transcribed conjectural claims, empty evidence/criticism files); this workplan is the actual research and writing work M0 explicitly deferred.

Residual carried from CR-WP-0002 T03: the M2 claim/evidence/criticism linkage exercise (does the Coulomb-native representation help conduct real research?) depends on this workplan producing real manuscript content first, and is expected to be its own follow-up workplan once M1 closes.

Inputs: research/programs/RP-000-researching-research/papers/paper-000/ (all files), research/programs/RP-000-researching-research/questions.md, seed/CoulombResearchMilestonePlan.md (M1 section), and docs/ResearchArtifactConvention.md.

Draft Sections 1-3 and 5-10 (Kernel Presentation and Framing)

id: CR-WP-0003-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "2b872628-b731-5b71-a687-8afd5ae4fbfc"

Write real content for manuscript.md sections 1 (Motivation), 2 (Problem), 3 (Design objective), 5 (Cybernetic research loop), 6 (Recursive self-improvement), 8 (Interoperability with conventional science), and 9 (Decentralization and programmable resources), replacing their [MISSING] markers. Section 4 (kernel primitives) may be drafted as a condensed presentation of seed/CoulombResearchKernel.md §2 rather than restarted from scratch. Section 10 (signals and relevance) should draw on seed/ResearchSignals.md and seed/ResearchCharts.md only to the extent they inform this paper's actual claims — do not import unrelated content for completeness.

Done when each listed section states a real position (not a further placeholder) and any conjectural claim not yet backed by evidence is marked [CONJECTURE], per the manuscript's existing draft-state convention.

Draft Sections 7, 11-14 (Reflexive and Closing Sections)

id: CR-WP-0003-T02
status: done
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "164e498f-8276-5f59-afad-954368c19189"

Write section 7 (Human-AI research participation), referencing this paper's own contribution record in publication.yaml and revision-log.md as a concrete example. Write section 12 (Initial experiments), reporting on RP-000/CR-000 itself as the running experiment. Write section 13 (Open research questions) as a summary drawn from research/programs/RP-000-researching-research/questions.md. Leave section 11 (Failure modes) and the Abstract for T03 — both depend on criticism and a complete draft respectively, per the existing [MISSING] rationale in manuscript.md.

Done when sections 7, 12, and 13 state real content, and 11/Abstract remain explicitly marked [MISSING] with their existing rationale intact (not silently dropped).

Solicit Initial Criticism, Write Failure Modes, Close Out v0.1

id: CR-WP-0003-T03
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "f1ffc924-5b95-5f2d-a6c3-2f065dfcfee1"

After T01/T02 produce a complete draft body, add at least one real criticism entry to criticism.md (self-criticism or collaborator review is acceptable at P1; do not fabricate external criticism). Use it to write section 11 (Failure modes) honestly, then write the Abstract last, once there is real content to summarize. Append a dated entry to revision-log.md recording the v0.1 milestone. Update claims.md entries' state field (conjectural/supported/contested/etc.) if T01/T02 introduced new claims or changed existing ones — do not leave claim state stale relative to the manuscript.

Run python3 scripts/validate_research_registry.py and the canonical Repo Manager sync. Before closure, evaluate whether M2 (claim/evidence discipline) is ready to become its own live workplan, and hand it off per the residual convention if so — do not silently fold M2 scope into this workplan.

Done when CR-000 v0.1 is a coherent internal-circulation manuscript (the M1 exit criterion) with publication.yaml version: "0.1" confirmed accurate, no [MISSING] markers remaining except where explicitly deferred with stated rationale, and the registry validator passes.

Closed: added CR-000-X001 and CR-000-X002 to criticism.md (self-criticism), updated CR-000-C002/CR-000-C003 to contested in claims.md, added CR-000-C006–CR-000-C008, wrote the Abstract and §11 (Failure modes) last. Registry validator passes. M2 (independent criticism, evidence linkage, and a response to the document-centrism criticism) handed off as workplans/CR-WP-0004-claim-evidence-discipline.md rather than folded into this workplan.

Non-Goals

No P2/P3 publication advancement, no M2 claim/evidence/criticism linkage work (that is a separate follow-up), no CR-001 work, no facility software beyond the existing validation script.