Paper Candidate Intake

Paper candidate intake is the minimum schema for papers collected by discovery agents before they become curated notes. It keeps raw candidates useful without pretending they are verified reviews.

$$\text{candidate}=\text{metadata}+\text{route}+\text{claim}+\text{evidence}+\text{next action}$$

Minimum Fields

Field	Required Value
Source	URL, arXiv, DOI, venue page, project page, or to verify
Metadata	title, authors, year, venue/status, publication type
Why collected	one sentence explaining relevance to AI, Molecular Modeling, Math, Infra, Agents, or Projects
Primary route	paper, concept update, benchmark note, project note, post idea, or drop
Main axis	architecture, learning method, generative model, molecular modeling, Math, evaluation, systems, agents
Candidate claim	one narrow claim, written as paper claim
Evidence pointer	figure, table, benchmark, theorem, artifact, or to verify
Risk	missing source, weak fit, benchmark issue, leakage, private info, hype, duplicate
Next action	smallest verification or promotion step
Status	inbox, triage, reading, defer, or drop

Candidate Block

Use this block inside daily briefs:

### Paper title
 
- Source: to verify
- Metadata: authors `to verify`; year `to verify`; venue/status `to verify`
- Why collected: to verify
- Primary route: paper / concept update / benchmark note / post idea / drop
- Main axis: architecture / learning method / generative model / molecular modeling / Math / evaluation / systems / agents
- Candidate claim: to verify
- Evidence pointer: to verify
- Related wiki notes:
  - [Coverage matrix](/concepts/coverage-matrix)
- Risk: to verify
- Next action: verify metadata
- Status: inbox

Promotion Decision

Decision	Use When	Start
Paper note	source is public, metadata is verified, and claims need durable tracking	Paper triage
Concept update	the reusable idea is more important than the single paper	Concept update contract
Benchmark note	the evaluation protocol is the main value	Benchmark intake
Korean post idea	several wiki notes already form a reader-facing path	AI Computational Biology Math post intake, Wiki bundle checklist
Curation queue	promising but missing metadata, relevance, or verification	Curation queue
Drop	duplicate, unverifiable, out of scope, or unsafe for public notes	Inbox triage

Checks

• Does the candidate have a public source?
• Is missing metadata marked to verify?
• Is the claim written narrowly as a paper claim?
• Is the main axis chosen before creating a new page?
• Is there a route to concept update when the idea is reusable?
• Are benchmark, split, metric, and artifact issues flagged before promotion?
• Is the next action concrete enough for another agent to continue?

Related

• Inbox
• Inbox triage
• Curation queue
• Paper brief workflow
• Paper triage
• Claim routing
• Concept update contract
• Coverage matrix