# publication — scientific and academic papers

Applies when the source reads like a scholarly publication: a journal or conference paper, a
preprint, a thesis, or a technical report with an abstract, a methods/results structure, and a
reference list.

- **Hedges are part of the finding.** "The results suggest X" must never harden into "X is
  true" — the hedge ("suggests", "may", "is associated with"), the effect size, and the stated
  conditions survive into the wiki sentence. A hedged finding written unhedged changes the
  claim's meaning (`schema.md` § Grounding).
- **The paper's OWN findings vs claims it CITES.** A paper repeating prior work ("Smith 2019
  found Y") did not establish Y — write "the paper cites Smith 2019 for Y"[^sN], never as this
  paper's finding. Ingesting a secondhand claim as firsthand fabricates provenance strength.
- **Methods and sample caveats travel with the claim.** A finding qualified by its methods
  (n=12, in mice, self-reported, simulation-only) keeps that qualification in the same wiki
  sentence — a caveat parked in another paragraph is a caveat lost.
- **Abstract vs body can disagree.** Abstracts oversell; when the abstract states a claim more
  strongly than the results section supports, ingest the body's version and note the gap. The
  abstract restating a result is not a second fact — ingest it once, cite the deepest
  statement, with a locator.
- **Capture the bibliographic anchor.** Authors, venue/publisher, and year are cited facts —
  they date and attribute every finding on the topic pages. Authors get `persons/` pages only
  when they matter beyond the byline.
- Compose with `genres/prose.md` for the discussion section's argued positions ("the authors
  argue …" per `schema.md` § Opinions & style).
