update GPS-denied onboard research docs

This commit is contained in:
Oleksandr Bezdieniezhnykh
2026-04-29 17:03:57 +03:00
parent 8fcdbd4cf6
commit af5eb13ecb
22 changed files with 1938 additions and 6 deletions
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ Key principle: Critical-sensitivity topics (AI/LLMs, blockchain) require sources
- "What existing/competitor solutions address this problem?"
- "What are the component parts of this problem?"
- "For each component, what are the state-of-the-art solutions?"
- "For each component, what are the practical alternatives across simple baseline, established production option, open-source option, commercial option, current SOTA, adjacent-domain option, and no-build/defer option?"
- "What are the security considerations per component?"
- "What are the cost implications of each approach?"
@@ -48,6 +49,7 @@ Key principle: Critical-sensitivity topics (AI/LLMs, blockchain) require sources
- "What are the security vulnerabilities in the proposed architecture?"
- "Where are the performance bottlenecks?"
- "What solutions exist for each identified issue?"
- "For each component already selected in the draft, what alternatives should be considered before keeping, replacing, or rejecting it?"
**General sub-question patterns** (use when applicable):
- **Sub-question A**: "What is X and how does it work?" (Definition & mechanism)
@@ -84,6 +86,27 @@ For **each sub-question**, generate **at least 3-5 search query variants** befor
Record all planned queries in `00_question_decomposition.md` alongside each sub-question.
#### Component Option Breadth (MANDATORY)
Before Step 2, identify the component areas implied by the problem and create a search plan for options in each area. A component area is any replaceable tool, library, model, service, algorithm, data format, protocol, infrastructure pattern, or validation approach that could materially affect the solution.
For every component area, generate search queries for these option families unless clearly not applicable:
- **Simple baseline**: low-complexity classical or manual approach that can serve as a fallback or regression baseline.
- **Established production option**: mature library/service/pattern with field usage.
- **Open-source candidate**: permissive-license option with inspectable implementation and community history.
- **Commercial/vendor option**: paid or vendor-supported option, including SDK/platform constraints.
- **Current SOTA / research option**: recent model, paper, or benchmark leader that may be promising but immature.
- **Adjacent-domain option**: solution from a neighboring domain with similar constraints.
- **No-build / defer option**: whether the component can be avoided, simplified, or moved out of scope.
- **Known bad option**: candidate or family that appears attractive but has documented failure modes or disqualifiers.
For each component area, record:
- Candidate names and option families to search.
- At least 5 query variants covering alternatives, comparisons, limitations, licensing, runtime/scale, and exact project constraints.
- The minimum evidence needed to mark a candidate `Selected`, `Rejected`, `Experimental only`, or `Needs user decision`.
Add this as a "Component Option Search Plan" section in `00_question_decomposition.md`.
**Research Subject Boundary Definition (BLOCKING - must be explicit)**:
When decomposing questions, you must explicitly define the **boundaries of the research subject**:
@@ -123,6 +146,7 @@ Record the audit result in `00_question_decomposition.md` as a "Completeness Aud
- List of decomposed sub-questions
- **Chosen perspectives** (at least 3 from the Perspective Rotation table) with rationale
- **Search query variants** for each sub-question (at least 3-5 per sub-question)
- **Component Option Search Plan** (component areas, option families, candidate names, query variants, required evidence)
- **Completeness audit** (taxonomy cross-reference + domain discovery results)
4. Write TodoWrite to track progress
@@ -149,6 +173,13 @@ Do not stop at the first few results. The goal is to build a comprehensive evide
- Consult at least **2 different source tiers** per sub-question (e.g., L1 official docs + L4 community discussion)
- If initial searches yield fewer than 3 relevant sources for a sub-question, **broaden the search** with alternative terms, related domains, or analogous problems
**Minimum search effort per component area**:
- Search every option family from the "Component Option Search Plan" before choosing a lead candidate.
- For each lead, fallback, or rejected candidate, search at least one official/source-of-truth page and at least one independent validation source when available.
- Search `"[component] alternatives"`, `"[candidate] vs [alternative]"`, `"[candidate] limitations"`, `"[candidate] license"`, `"[candidate] production"`, and `"[candidate] [binding project constraint]"`.
- If fewer than 3 realistic candidates are found for a component area, explicitly document why the landscape is narrow and search adjacent domains before accepting that result.
- Include at least one simple baseline and one "do not use" or disqualified candidate per component area when possible; these prevent false confidence in the selected option.
**Candidate implementation-limit searches (MANDATORY)**:
For every component/tool/library/service/pattern/algorithm that may be selected or recommended, search for its intrinsic implementation constraints. Do not rely on product category labels, marketing summaries, or examples from a different operating context. Include query variants for:
- Official supported inputs/outputs, protocols, data formats, and deployment modes
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ Write to `03_comparison_framework.md`:
**Required exact-fit dimensions for component/tool decisions**:
When the output selects or recommends a component, tool, library, service, architecture pattern, or algorithm, the framework MUST include these dimensions unless explicitly not applicable:
- Option family (`Simple baseline`, `Established production`, `Open-source`, `Commercial/vendor`, `Current SOTA`, `Adjacent-domain`, `No-build/defer`, `Known bad`)
- Required inputs/outputs and ownership boundaries
- Operating context and lifecycle fit
- Non-functional envelope fit
@@ -33,6 +34,8 @@ When the output selects or recommends a component, tool, library, service, archi
- Evidence quality and source tier
- Selection status (`Selected`, `Rejected`, `Experimental only`, `Needs user decision`)
For each component area, include multiple candidates in the initial population. Do not present only the preferred option unless the investigation found no realistic alternatives; if so, state the searches that proved the narrow landscape.
---
### Step 5: Reference Point Baseline Alignment
@@ -146,9 +149,9 @@ Before finalizing the solution draft, build an exact-fit matrix for every compon
```markdown
# Component Fit Matrix
| Candidate | Intended Role | Project Constraints Checked | Evidence | Mismatches / Disqualifiers | Status | Decision Rationale |
|-----------|---------------|-----------------------------|----------|----------------------------|--------|--------------------|
| [name] | [role] | [constraints] | [Fact # / Source #] | [none / list] | Selected / Rejected / Experimental only / Needs user decision | [why] |
| Component Area | Candidate | Option Family | Intended Role | Project Constraints Checked | Evidence | Mismatches / Disqualifiers | Status | Decision Rationale |
|----------------|-----------|---------------|---------------|-----------------------------|----------|----------------------------|--------|--------------------|
| [area] | [name] | [family] | [role] | [constraints] | [Fact # / Source #] | [none / list] | Selected / Rejected / Experimental only / Needs user decision | [why] |
```
Rules:
@@ -156,6 +159,8 @@ Rules:
- `Experimental only` is required when a candidate might work but lacks proof for the exact operating context.
- `Rejected` is required when documented assumptions conflict with project constraints.
- `Needs user decision` is required when a mismatch changes scope, cost, safety, product behavior, or acceptance criteria.
- Each component area must include at least one selected or fallback-safe option, plus the most credible rejected/experimental alternatives discovered during web research.
- A component area with only one candidate is incomplete unless `00_question_decomposition.md` documents the broader searches and why they yielded no realistic alternatives.
- A candidate may not appear as the lead solution in Step 8 unless this gate marks it `Selected`.
**Save action**: Write `06_component_fit_matrix.md`.