The chart survived. The method did not.
A paper cites an experiment file, but the source instrument export, outlier rule, normalization parameters, and exact plotting input disappeared when the postdoc left.
Publish the evidence beside the result
- Instrument export Start with exact collected bytes, acquisition time, instrument identity, and the source claim.
- Outlier removal Append an operation statement with predecessor bindings, code identity, parameters, and exact output.
- Normalization Append the next statement with the statistics and software evidence needed to interpret the claim.
- Publication handoff Sign the exact graph and final plotting artifact distributed with the paper.
The honest limit
Makoto can preserve the inputs and signed claims needed to reproduce the workflow. It cannot reconstruct missing intermediate bytes after publication or prove that an instrument was calibrated merely because its identifier was signed.
Concrete publication bundle
| Input | Instrument export, calibration reference, collection parameters, and a signed origin statement over the exact raw bytes. |
|---|---|
| Steps | Append outlier-removal, normalization, analysis, and plotting statements; bind code and parameter artifacts where available. |
| Handoff | Publish the final figure data with the signed graph, required profiles, and exact terminal artifacts. |
| Reproduction check | A new researcher verifies the received bytes and can identify every missing intermediate instead of guessing it. |
The checked-in customer-data proof uses the same source → two transforms → signed handoff structure with downloadable intermediate artifacts.