-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
Improve survey strategies (Step 1) #3
Copy link
Copy link
Open
Description
Current Survey Strategies
The AI picks from these strategies during the survey step (Step 1) based on what is known vs. unknown in each iteration:
| # | Strategy | When to use |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Landscape mapping | First iteration default — broad field overview |
| 2 | Adjacent subfield | Deep-dive into a neighboring cluster identified in prior iteration |
| 3 | Cross-vocabulary | Abstract away jargon, search other fields for the same structural problem |
| 4 | Cross-method | Same problem, different computational or experimental approaches |
| 5 | Historical lineage | Who tried before, what failed, what changed since |
| 6 | Negative results | Search for papers showing what does not work |
| 7 | Benchmarks and datasets | What evaluation infrastructure exists |
How to contribute
This list is not exhaustive — there are likely more effective survey strategies we haven't thought of yet. If you know of a strategy that works well in your field, or you've noticed a gap in how the survey step explores the literature, please suggest it here!
Some questions to consider:
- Are there survey strategies specific to your research domain that are missing?
- Are there strategies that would help discover overlooked or underrepresented work?
- Should any existing strategies be refined, split, or merged?
- Are there strategies for discovering non-traditional sources (patents, standards, industry reports, preregistrations)?
Please describe:
- The strategy name
- When to use it (what gap does it fill?)
- An example of how it would work in practice
Reactions are currently unavailable
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels