/results-report

name: results-report
description: This skill should be used when the user asks to "write an experiment report", "summarize experimental results", "do experiment retrospection", "write a results report", "写实验总结报告", "写实验复盘", or mentions turning completed experiment artifacts into a structured, decision-oriented research report. It assumes strict analysis should come from `results-analysis` first.
version: 0.1.0
tags: [Research, Reporting, Experiments, Obsidian]

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` clai