research-wiki

name	research-wiki
description	Persistent research knowledge base that accumulates papers, ideas, experiments, claims, and their relationships across the entire research lifecycle. Inspired by Karpathy's LLM Wiki pattern. Use when user says "知识库", "research wiki", "add paper", "wiki query", "查知识库", or wants to build/query a persistent field map.
argument-hint	[{"subcommand":"init|ingest|sync|query|update|lint|stats"}]
allowed-tools	Bash(*), Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, WebSearch, WebFetch, mcp__codex__codex, mcp__codex__codex-reply

Research Wiki: Persistent Research Knowledge Base

Subcommand: $ARGUMENTS

Overview

The research wiki is a persistent, per-project knowledge base that accumulates structured knowledge across the entire ARIS research lifecycle. Unlike one-off literature surveys that are used and forgotten, the wiki compounds — every paper read, idea tested, experiment run, and review received makes the wiki smarter.

Inspired by Karpathy's LLM Wiki pattern: compile knowledge once, keep it current, don't re-derive on every query.

Core Concepts

Four Entity Types

Entity	Directory	Node ID format	What it represents
Paper	papers/	paper:<slug>	A published or preprint research paper
Idea	ideas/	idea:<id>	A research idea (proposed, tested, or failed)
Experiment	experiments/	exp:<id>	A concrete experiment run with results
Claim	claims/	claim:<id>	A theorem/headline with an honest PROOF status — born via /proof-checker (see Hook 4)

Typed Relationships (graph/edges.jsonl)

Edge type	From → To	Meaning
extends	paper → paper	Builds on prior work
contradicts	paper → paper	Disagrees with results/claims
addresses_gap	paper|idea → gap	Targets a known field gap
inspired_by	idea → paper	Idea sourced from this paper
tested_by	idea|claim → exp	Tested in this experiment
supports	exp → claim|idea	Experiment confirms claim
invalidates	exp → claim|idea	Experiment disproves claim
supersedes	paper → paper	Newer work replaces older

Edges are stored in graph/edges.jsonl only. The ## Connections section on each page is auto-generated from the graph — never hand-edit it.

Capture hygiene (anti-self-poisoning)

Before persisting an idea / claim / experiment note, screen it for operational noise that would harden into a self-cited falsehood (see shared-references/capture-antipatterns.md). Resolve the helper via the canonical chain (integration-contract §2): .aris/tools/capture_filter.py → tools/capture_filter.py → $ARIS_REPO/tools/capture_filter.py (warn-and-skip if unresolved). Run python3 <capture_filter> - on the note text; if it flags env-failure / transient-error / negative-tool-claim, do NOT store it as a durable node — rewrite it to the fix / missing config / workaround, or drop it. Never store "codex/gemini/the reviewer can't do X" — that gets loaded into every future session and cited against the agent long after the real cause is gone. (The wiki's "failed ideas → anti-repeat memory" is the GOOD inverse: a class-level research finding, not operational noise.)

Wiki Directory Structure

research-wiki/
  index.md               # categorical index (auto-generated)
  log.md                 # append-only timeline
  gap_map.md             # field gaps with stable IDs (G1, G2, ...)
  query_pack.md          # compressed summary for /idea-creator (auto-generated, max 8000 chars)
  papers/
    <slug>.md            # one page per paper
  ideas/
    <idea_id>.md         # one page per idea
  experiments/
    <exp_id>.md          # one page per experiment
  claims/
    <claim_id>.md        # one page per testable claim
  graph/
    edges.jsonl          # materialized current relationship graph

Subcommands

Helper resolution (run before any subcommand below)

All wiki operations except plain directory bootstrap go through a single canonical helper, tools/research_wiki.py. Skills that touch the wiki must resolve $WIKI_SCRIPT via the chain below — never hard-code python3 tools/research_wiki.py …. Hard-coding silently fails when the project does not have tools/ on disk (the post-install_aris.sh default), which is exactly the failure mode that left a real user's research-wiki/ empty for a week.

cd "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)" || exit 1
ARIS_REPO="${ARIS_REPO:-$(awk -F'\t' '$1=="repo_root"{print $2; exit}' .aris/installed-skills.txt 2>/dev/null)}"
WIKI_SCRIPT=".aris/tools/research_wiki.py"
[ -f "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ] || WIKI_SCRIPT="tools/research_wiki.py"
[ -f "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ] || { [ -n "${ARIS_REPO:-}" ] && WIKI_SCRIPT="$ARIS_REPO/tools/research_wiki.py"; }
[ -f "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ] || {
  echo "ERROR: research_wiki.py not found at .aris/tools/, tools/, or \$ARIS_REPO/tools/." >&2
  echo "       Fix one of:" >&2
  echo "         1. rerun 'bash tools/install_aris.sh' from the ARIS repo (creates .aris/tools symlink)" >&2
  echo "         2. export ARIS_REPO=<path-to-ARIS-repo>" >&2
  echo "         3. cp <ARIS-repo>/tools/research_wiki.py tools/" >&2
  exit 1
}

/research-wiki itself is the wiki tool — if the helper is missing the skill hard-fails. Caller skills that update the wiki as a side effect (/idea-creator, /result-to-claim, /research-lit, /arxiv, /alphaxiv, /deepxiv, /semantic-scholar, /exa-search) use the same chain but warn-and-skip instead of hard-failing — their primary output (idea list, claim verdict, paper summary) must still be delivered to the user.

/research-wiki init

Initialize the wiki for the current project. After resolving $WIKI_SCRIPT per the chain above:

python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" init research-wiki/

The helper creates research-wiki/{papers,ideas,experiments,claims,graph}/ plus index.md, log.md, gap_map.md, query_pack.md, and graph/edges.jsonl, then appends "Wiki initialized" to log.md.

(Earlier versions of this skill described a prose-only init that omitted query_pack.md — that drifted from the helper and made /idea-creator's Phase 0 query-pack check fall through to a rebuild_query_pack invocation that, under the old hard-coded path, silently failed. Delegating init to the helper is the single source of truth for the wiki schema.)

/research-wiki ingest "<paper title>" — arxiv: <id>

Add a paper to the wiki. This subcommand is thin wrapping around python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ingest_paper …, which is the single implementation of paper ingest in ARIS (per shared-references/integration-contract.md — one helper, no copies). The helper does all of:

1. Fetch metadata — queries the arXiv Atom API when --arxiv-id is given
2. Generate slug — <first_author_last_name><year>_<keyword>
3. Check dedup — skip an existing page unless --update-on-exist
4. Create page — papers/<slug>.md with the schema below
5. Rebuild index.md and query_pack.md
6. Append log.md

Edge extraction (step 5/8 in the old manual flow) is not in ingest_paper; do it as a follow-up with add_edge per relationship identified:

# arXiv-known paper
python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ingest_paper research-wiki/ \
    --arxiv-id 2501.12345 --thesis "One-line claim from abstract."

# Venue paper with no arXiv mirror
python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ingest_paper research-wiki/ \
    --title "Attention Is All You Need" \
    --authors "Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, …" --year 2017 --venue "NeurIPS"

# Manual edge after ingest
python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" add_edge research-wiki/ \
    --from "paper:vaswani2017_attention_all_you" \
    --to "paper:chen2025_factorized_gap" \
    --type "extends" --evidence "Section 3.2: adapts the encoder block …"

Other skills (/research-lit, /arxiv, /alphaxiv, /deepxiv, /semantic-scholar, /exa-search) call the same helper directly in their own last step — they don't re-route through /research-wiki ingest as a subcommand, so they don't need an LLM roundtrip.

/research-wiki sync — arxiv-ids <id1>,<id2>,...

Batch backfill: ingest one or more arXiv IDs that were read earlier without being ingested (e.g., because research-wiki/ was set up after the reading happened, or a hook didn't fire).

# Explicit list
python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" sync research-wiki/ \
    --arxiv-ids 2310.06770,1706.03762

# From a file (one id per line, # comments ok)
python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" sync research-wiki/ --from-file ids.txt

Dedup is handled per-id; already-ingested papers are skipped silently. This is the recommended manual repair step (see integration contract §5 Backfill). sync does not scan session traces — callers declare the ids explicitly.

Paper page schema (exactly what ingest_paper emits — do not handwrite alternative fields; lint will flag drift):

---
type: paper
node_id: paper:<slug>
title: "<full title>"
authors: ["First A. Author", "Second B. Author"]
year: 2025
venue: "arXiv"
external_ids:
  arxiv: "2501.12345"
  doi: null
  s2: null
tags: ["tag1", "tag2"]
added: 2026-04-07T10:12:00Z
---

# <full title>

## One-line thesis

[Single sentence capturing the paper's core contribution]

## Problem / Gap

## Method

## Key Results

## Assumptions

## Limitations / Failure Modes

## Reusable Ingredients

[Techniques, datasets, or insights that could be repurposed]

## Open Questions

## Claims

[Reference claim pages: claim:C1, claim:C2, etc.]

## Connections

[AUTO-GENERATED from graph/edges.jsonl — do not edit manually]

## Relevance to This Project

[Why this paper matters for our specific research direction]

Additionally, when the paper was ingested via --arxiv-id and the arXiv API returned an abstract, the helper appends an ## Abstract (original) section after Relevance to This Project containing the raw abstract text as a blockquote. Manual ingests (no --arxiv-id) do not include this section.

/research-wiki query "<topic>"

Generate query_pack.md — a compressed, context-window-friendly summary:

Fixed budget (max 8000 chars / ~2000 tokens):

Section	Budget	Content
Project direction	full sections	Structured extraction from RESEARCH_BRIEF.md by ## heading (Problem / Constraints / Direction / Background / Non-Goals / Domain Knowledge / Existing Results), in priority order. No per-field char cap — the 8000-char assembly loop is the only safety net. Falls back to a flat 600-char slice if the brief uses no known headings.
Top 5 gaps	1200 chars	From gap_map.md, ranked by: unresolved + linked ideas + failed experiments
Paper clusters	1600 chars	3-5 clusters by tag overlap, 2-3 sentences each
Failed ideas	1400 chars	Always included — highest anti-repetition value
Top papers	1800 chars	8-12 pages ranked by: linked gaps, linked ideas, centrality, relevance flag
Active chains	900 chars	limitation → opportunity relationship chains
Open unknowns	500 chars	Unresolved questions across the wiki

Pruning priority (when over budget): low-ranked papers > cluster detail > chain detail. Never prune failed ideas or top gaps first.

Key rule: Read from short fields only (frontmatter, one-line thesis, gap summary, failure note). Do not summarize full page bodies every time.

/research-wiki update <node_id> — <field>: <value>

Update a specific entity:

/research-wiki update paper:chen2025 — relevance: core
/research-wiki update idea:001 — outcome: negative
/research-wiki update claim:C1 — status: refuted

After any update: rebuild query_pack.md, update log.md.

/research-wiki lint

Health check the wiki:

1. Orphan pages — entities with zero edges
2. Stale claims — claims still status: drafted or status: unproven older than 14 days
3. Contradictions — claims with both supports and invalidates edges
4. Missing connections — papers sharing 2+ tags but no explicit relationship
5. Dead ideas — stage: proposed ideas that were never tested
6. Sparse pages — pages with 3+ empty sections

Output a LINT_REPORT.md with suggested fixes.

/research-wiki stats

Quick overview:

📚 Research Wiki Stats
Papers: 28 (12 core, 10 related, 6 peripheral)
Ideas: 7 (2 active, 3 failed, 1 partial, 1 succeeded)
Experiments: 12
Claims: 15 (8 verified, 4 unproven, 2 refuted, 1 sound-modulo-imports)
Edges: 64
Gaps: 8 (3 unresolved)
Last updated: 2026-04-07T10:12:00Z

Integration with Existing Workflows

All paper-reading skills follow the same integration contract (see shared-references/integration-contract.md):

• single predicate — [ -d research-wiki/ ]
• single canonical helper — python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ingest_paper … after resolving $WIKI_SCRIPT via the chain at the top of this SKILL
• concrete artifact — papers/<slug>.md + log.md entry
• backfill — sync --arxiv-ids …
• diagnostic — verify_wiki_coverage.sh (Policy E; resolved per integration-contract §2)

Hook 1: After /research-lit finds papers

# At end of research-lit, after synthesis:
if research-wiki/ exists AND $WIKI_SCRIPT resolved (chain at top of this SKILL):
    for paper in top_relevant_papers (limit 8-12):
        python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" ingest_paper research-wiki/ \
            --arxiv-id <id> [--thesis "..."] [--tags "..."]
        for each explicit relation to existing wiki paper:
            python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" add_edge research-wiki/ \
                --from "paper:<slug>" --to "<target>" \
                --type <extends|contradicts|addresses_gap|...> \
                --evidence "..."
    log "research-lit ingested N papers"
elif research-wiki/ exists but $WIKI_SCRIPT did not resolve:
    warn "wiki update skipped — research_wiki.py unreachable; rerun install_aris.sh"

Each paper-reading skill ships its own Step "Update Research Wiki (if active)" that calls the same helper once per paper it touched. The business logic is not duplicated — only the loop over that skill's specific result set differs.

Hook 2: /idea-creator reads AND writes wiki

Before ideation:

if research-wiki/query_pack.md exists (and < 7 days old):
    prepend query_pack to landscape context
    treat failed ideas as banlist
    treat top gaps as search seeds
    still run fresh literature search for last 3-6 months

After ideation (CRITICAL — without it, ideas/ stays empty; runs on EVERY generation, including a re-run with updated constraints): the page write is a deterministic helper command, not a freehand step the model can skip:

for idea in all_generated_ideas (recommended + killed):
    python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" upsert_idea research-wiki/ \
      --slug <stable-id> --title <title> --stage <proposed|archived> --outcome pending \
      --thesis <...> --risks <...> --based-on <paper:slug,...> --target-gaps <G2,...>
    # one call: writes ideas/<slug>.md, wires inspired_by/addresses_gap edges,
    # rebuilds index + query_pack, logs. Default skip-on-exist (won't clobber an
    # existing idea enriched by /result-to-claim). `outcome` ∈ {unknown, pending,
    # negative, mixed, positive} — the experiment verdict is set later by
    # /result-to-claim, never guessed at ideation.
log "idea-creator wrote N ideas to wiki"

Hook 3: After /result-to-claim verdict

# Create/refresh the experiment node FIRST via the deterministic helper (verdict owner
# → --update-on-exist). This is the experiment BIRTH point. add_edge does NOT verify
# node existence, so GATE the supports/invalidates edges below on the node having been
# born (EXP_NODE_OK) — else they'd dangle off a missing exp node.
EXP_NODE_OK = (python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" add_experiment research-wiki/ --slug <exp_id> \
  --idea idea:<active_idea> --verdict <yes|partial|no> --confidence <high|medium|low> \
  --metrics <...> --reasoning <...> --provenance <run dir> --update-on-exist) succeeded
  # writes page + idea--tested_by-->exp edge + rebuilds index/query_pack

# Record empirical support as EDGES ONLY, and ONLY if EXP_NODE_OK — never overwrite the
# claim's `status`. A claim's `status` is the PROOF axis (verified / sound-modulo-imports
# / refuted / unproven / drafted / retracted), owned by /proof-checker (the claim birth
# point). Experiment support is a SEPARATE axis carried entirely by supports/invalidates
# edges; writing "supported"/"invalidated" into status is rejected by the validator.
if EXP_NODE_OK:
    for claim_id in resolved_claims:
        if verdict == "yes":
            add_edge(exp_id, claim_id, "supports")
        elif verdict == "partial":
            add_edge(exp_id, claim_id, "supports")   # partial — qualify in --evidence
        else:
            add_edge(exp_id, claim_id, "invalidates")

# Update idea outcome
update_idea(active_idea_id, outcome=verdict)

# If failed, record WHY for future ideation
if verdict in ("no", "partial"):
    update_idea failure_notes with specific metrics and reasons

rebuild query_pack
log "result-to-claim: exp_id updated, verdict=..."

Hook 4: Claim birth — from /proof-checker (the ONLY birth point)

Wiki claim nodes are born here. /proof-checker Phase 5.5 calls add_claim for each top-level theorem/headline after writing PROOF_AUDIT.json, stamping an honest PROOF-axis status and a provenance pointer to the audit trace. No other skill creates a claim node: /result-to-claim (Hook 3) only adds empirical supports/invalidates edges to an already-born claim and never edits its status.

# (run by /proof-checker; shown here for the wiki's record)
python3 "$WIKI_SCRIPT" add_claim research-wiki/ --slug thm-main-ub \
  --name "Main upper bound" --status verified \
  --provenance ".aris/traces/proof-checker/<run>/" --statement "..." --update-on-exist

Claim status ∈ {drafted, unproven, sound-modulo-imports, verified, refuted, retracted} — the proof axis only. Empirical support is a separate axis, carried entirely by edges (Hook 3), never written into status.

Re-ideation Trigger

After significant wiki updates, suggest re-running /idea-creator:

• ≥5 new papers ingested since last ideation
• ≥3 new failed/partial ideas since last ideation
• New contradiction discovered in the graph
• New gap identified that no existing idea addresses

The system suggests but does not auto-trigger. User decides.

Key Rules

• One source of truth for relationships: graph/edges.jsonl. Page Connections sections are auto-generated views.
• Canonical node IDs everywhere: paper:<slug>, idea:<id>, exp:<id>, claim:<id>, gap:<id>. Never use raw titles or inconsistent shorthands.
• Failed ideas are the most valuable memory. Never prune them from query_pack.
• query_pack.md is hard-budgeted at 8000 chars. Deterministic generation, not open-ended summarization.
• Append to log.md for every mutation. The log is the audit trail.
• Reviewer independence applies. When the wiki is read by cross-model review skills, pass file paths only — do not summarize wiki content for the reviewer.

Acknowledgements

Inspired by Karpathy's LLM Wiki — "compile knowledge once, keep it current, don't re-derive on every query."