survey-synthesis-builder

name	survey-synthesis-builder
description	Builds a source-grounded Robotics or AI survey from verified reading cards, search logs, evidence matrices, and bibliography records. Use when defining a survey thesis or taxonomy, synthesizing literature across method families, designing section logic and comparison artifacts, revising an existing survey, or drafting survey prose without forcing an empirical-paper structure.

Survey Synthesis Builder

Turn a verified literature base into an argument about a field. Do not produce an annotated bibliography or impose a Method/Experiments template.

Read references/survey-contract.md before a standard or deep synthesis.

Inputs

• Survey question, intended audience, scope boundary, date cutoff, and target format or venue when known.
• Reproducible search log and inclusion/exclusion criteria.
• Verified reading cards and bibliography records.
• Evidence matrix with traceable rows and explicit missing coverage.
• Optional taxonomy notes, competing surveys, existing outline, tables, figures, or draft.

If the evidence base is thin or unverified, produce a coverage gate instead of drafting conclusions.

Workflow

1. Validate source trust, search coverage, time cutoff, and inclusion scope. Distinguish full-text evidence from metadata-only sources.
2. Define a synthesis contract: reader, central question, one survey thesis, promised coverage, excluded territory, and claims the evidence cannot make.
3. Generate at least two plausible organizing structures when taxonomy is not locked. Compare their explanatory value, coverage balance, overlap, and stability under new papers before selecting one.
4. Build taxonomy categories from evidence-matrix patterns. Define membership, edge cases, multi-label handling, and category limitations.
5. Build a claim-evidence map for field evolution, agreements, disagreements, trade-offs, benchmark limitations, and open problems. Preserve conflicting evidence rather than averaging it away.
6. Assign each section one question, synthesis claim, evidence set, comparison artifact, and transition. Remove sections that only list papers.
7. Plan tables and figures that expose comparison structure, coverage, or evolution. Do not duplicate prose in visual form.
8. Draft in dependency order: taxonomy and technical synthesis first, then evaluation/gaps, introduction, conclusion, and abstract. Use supplied citation keys and visible missing-evidence markers.
9. Audit coverage balance, repeated paper descriptions, unsupported trends, taxonomy circularity, recency bias, and confusion between absence of reporting and negative evidence.
10. End with bounded open problems derived from evidence gaps, not generic future-work language.

Depth

• quick: resolve one taxonomy, claim thread, or section synthesis problem.
• standard: produce the synthesis contract, taxonomy, claim-evidence map, section contracts, and focused draft.
• deep: produce or revise the full survey and run coverage, structure, and citation-risk checks.

Default to standard. Use deep only after the source base is stable enough that full-draft work will not be discarded immediately.

Outputs

survey/
|-- synthesis-contract.md
|-- taxonomy.md
|-- claim-evidence-map.md
|-- section-contracts.md
`-- survey-draft.md          # or user-supplied LaTeX structure

In quick mode, update only the requested artifact.

Rules

• Do not fabricate papers, citations, bibliographic fields, historical trends, benchmark facts, or category membership.
• Do not call an uncovered combination a research gap without checking whether it lies inside the search and inclusion scope.
• Do not treat not reported as shown ineffective.
• Do not count citations or papers as evidence of scientific quality.
• Do not make taxonomy categories mutually exclusive unless the evidence and definitions justify that constraint.
• Do not reuse claims from an abandoned draft until they trace to verified sources.
• Keep author proposals visibly separate from surveyed findings.

Validation

• Every synthesis claim traces to evidence-matrix rows and reading cards.
• Every taxonomy category has a definition, membership rule, evidence, and known edge cases.
• Section transitions advance one central thesis rather than chronology alone.
• Competing or negative evidence is represented fairly.
• Open problems are tied to demonstrated limitations or coverage gaps.
• Citation-bearing prose uses verified sources or explicit markers.

Completion

Done means the survey has a defensible synthesis contract, evidence-derived organization, traceable claims, balanced coverage, and visible uncertainty.