Back to list
WILLOSCAR

evidence-binder

by WILLOSCAR

Research pipelines as semantic execution units: each skill declares inputs/outputs, acceptance criteria, and guardrails. Evidence-first methodology prevents hollow writing through structured intermediate artifacts.

83🍴 10📅 Jan 24, 2026

SKILL.md


name: evidence-binder description: | Bind addressable evidence IDs from papers/evidence_bank.jsonl to each subsection (H3), producing outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl. Trigger: evidence binder, evidence plan, section->evidence mapping, 证据绑定, evidence_id. Use when: papers/evidence_bank.jsonl exists and you want writer/auditor to use section-scoped evidence items (WebWeaver-style memory bank). Skip if: you are not doing evidence-first section-by-section writing. Network: none. Guardrail: NO PROSE; do not invent evidence; only select from the existing evidence bank.

Evidence Binder (NO PROSE)

Goal: convert a paper-level pool into a subsection-addressable evidence plan.

This skill is the bridge from “Evidence Bank” → “Writer”: the writer should only use evidence IDs bound to the current subsection.

Why this matters for writing quality:

  • Weak/undifferentiated bindings force the writer to either pad prose or cite out-of-scope.
  • Treat binding_gaps as a routing signal: fix upstream evidence/mapping instead of "writing around" missing evidence.

Inputs

  • outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl
  • outline/mapping.tsv
  • papers/evidence_bank.jsonl
  • Optional:
    • citations/ref.bib (to validate cite keys when evidence items carry citations)

Outputs

  • outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl (1 JSONL record per subsection)
  • outline/evidence_binding_report.md (summary; bullets + small tables)
    • Includes gaps (missing required evidence fields) and tag mix (selected evidence tags) so subsection-specific evidence needs are visible.

Output format (outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl)

JSONL (one object per H3 subsection). Best-effort fields (keep deterministic):

  • sub_id, title
  • paper_ids (papers in-scope for this subsection, from mapping.tsv)
  • mapped_bibkeys (bibkeys mapped to this subsection)
  • bibkeys (a selected subset to encourage subsection-first citations)
  • evidence_ids (selected evidence items from papers/evidence_bank.jsonl)
  • evidence_counts (small summary by claim_type / tag / evidence_level)
  • binding_rationale (short bullets; why the selected evidence covers this subsection’s axes / desired tags)
  • binding_gaps (list[str]; required evidence fields not covered by selected evidence; drives the evidence self-loop upstream)

Binding policy (how strict to be)

  • Subsection-first by default: the writer should primarily cite bibkeys and use evidence_ids bound to this sub_id.
  • Allow limited within-chapter reuse: citations from sibling H3s within the same H2 chapter may be reused for background/evaluation framing, but:
    • keep >=2 subsection-specific citations per H3 (avoid “free cite drift”)
    • avoid cross-chapter reuse unless the outline explicitly calls for it

Workflow (NO PROSE)

  1. Read outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl to understand each H3’s scope/rq/axes.
  2. Read outline/mapping.tsv to know which papers belong to each subsection.
  3. Read papers/evidence_bank.jsonl and select a subsection-scoped set of evidence_id items per H3.
  4. If citations/ref.bib exists, sanity-check that any cite keys referenced by selected evidence items are defined.
  5. Write outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl and outline/evidence_binding_report.md.

Freeze policy

  • If outline/evidence_bindings.refined.ok exists, the script will not overwrite outline/evidence_bindings.jsonl.
  • Treat this marker as an explicit refinement/completion signal (especially in strict runs): only create it after you have checked binding_gaps and tag mix look subsection-specific.

Heterogeneity sanity check (avoid recipe-like bindings)

A common hidden failure mode is mechanical uniformity: every H3 ends up with the same claim_type/tag mix, which hides what each subsection is actually missing and pushes the writer toward generic prose.

Before you mark bindings as refined:

  • Scan outline/evidence_binding_report.md: different H3 should show meaningfully different tag mix / claim_type balance.
  • If most H3 look identical, treat it as a binder smell: tighten required_evidence_fields, adjust selection rationale, or enrich the evidence bank, then rerun.

Script

Quick Start

  • python .codex/skills/evidence-binder/scripts/run.py --help
  • python .codex/skills/evidence-binder/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws>

All Options

  • --workspace <dir>: workspace root
  • --unit-id <U###>: unit id (optional; for logs)
  • --inputs <semicolon-separated>: override inputs (rare; prefer defaults)
  • --outputs <semicolon-separated>: override outputs (rare; prefer defaults)
  • --checkpoint <C#>: checkpoint id (optional; for logs)

Examples

  • Bind evidence IDs after building the evidence bank:
    • Ensure papers/evidence_bank.jsonl exists.
    • Run: python .codex/skills/evidence-binder/scripts/run.py --workspace workspaces/<ws>

Troubleshooting

Issue: some subsections have too few evidence IDs

Fix:

  • Strengthen papers/evidence_bank.jsonl via paper-notes (more extractable evidence items).
  • Or broaden the mapped paper set for the subsection via section-mapper, then rerun binder.

Issue: binding_gaps is non-empty (missing evidence types)

What it means:

  • The subsection brief requires certain evidence fields (e.g., benchmarks/metrics/security/tooling), but the bound evidence items do not cover them.

Fix (self-loop upstream):

  • Prefer enriching papers/evidence_bank.jsonl / papers/paper_notes.jsonl for mapped papers (extract benchmark/metric/failure-mode details).
  • If the mapping is weak for that evidence type, expand outline/mapping.tsv for the subsection and rerun binder.
  • If the requirement is unrealistic for the subsection’s scope, revise outline/subsection_briefs.jsonl:required_evidence_fields and rerun binder.

Score

Total Score

70/100

Based on repository quality metrics

SKILL.md

SKILL.mdファイルが含まれている

+20
LICENSE

ライセンスが設定されている

0/10
説明文

100文字以上の説明がある

+10
人気

GitHub Stars 100以上

0/15
最近の活動

1ヶ月以内に更新

+10
フォーク

10回以上フォークされている

+5
Issue管理

オープンIssueが50未満

+5
言語

プログラミング言語が設定されている

+5
タグ

1つ以上のタグが設定されている

+5

Reviews

💬

Reviews coming soon