Lab Notebook Management

Overview

Provides lab notebook creation and management for individual bioinformatics experiments. Supports both Jupyter notebooks (.ipynb) for Python-based experiments and Markdown (.md) for non-Python experiments.

Core Capabilities

1. Create New Lab Notebook

Create a new experiment notebook using templates through interactive dialogue to ensure high-quality, narrative documentation.

When to use: When starting a new experiment or analysis.

CRITICAL PRINCIPLE: Do NOT simply copy templates with placeholders. Engage in interactive dialogue with the user to create narrative content for each section, especially:

• Experiment purpose and objectives
• Background information and context
• Experimental procedures
• Results interpretation and discussion (after execution)

Workflow:

Step 1: Basic Setup

1. Determine experiment number (check existing notebook/labnote/ files)
2. Ask user:
   • Experiment title/description
   • Format preference (Jupyter vs Markdown)

Step 2: Interactive Content Creation - Core Questions

MANDATORY: Ask these core questions to build high-quality narrative content. Do NOT skip any question.

2.1 Purpose & Motivation (fills Background):

• "What problem or question does this experiment address?"
• "Why is this important to the broader research goal?"
• "What motivated you to run this experiment now?"

2.2 Prior Work & Context (fills Background):

• Check STEERING.md and previous notebooks for related experiments
• "What prior experiments led to this? (e.g., Exp01 showed X, so now we test Y)"
• "What literature findings inform this experiment?"
• "How does this fit into the overall research narrative?"

2.3 Hypothesis & Expected Outcome (fills Hypothesis):

• "What is your testable prediction?"
• "What specific outcome do you expect?"
• Engage in dialogue to refine:
  • Is it specific enough? (variables, relationships, expected magnitude)
  • Is it testable with available data/methods?
• Reference references/notebook-guidelines.md for quality standards

2.4 Success Criteria & Effect Size (fills Hypothesis/Methods):

• "What quantitative change would confirm success?" (e.g., fold-change > 2, p < 0.05, AUC > 0.8)
• "What is the minimum effect size you consider biologically meaningful?"
• "How will you know if the experiment 'worked'?"

2.5 Primary Endpoints (fills Methods):

• "What are the main measurements or variables?"
• "Which endpoint is most critical to the hypothesis?"

2.6 Controls & Replication (fills Methods):

• "What are the control conditions (positive/negative controls)?"
• "How many replicates will you run?"
• "What normalization or baseline comparisons will you use?"

2.7 Anticipated Risks & Rescue Plans (fills Discussion/Next Steps):

• "What could go wrong with this approach?"
• "What alternative methods exist if the primary approach fails?"
• "What confounding factors might affect interpretation?"

Synthesize Narrative: Use dialog answers to write Hypothesis and Background as coherent prose paragraphs, not bullet lists.

For Materials and Methods Section:

• Ask the user about:
  • Data sources and versions
  • Tools and software versions
  • Step-by-step procedure
  • Parameters and settings
• Engage in dialogue to ensure completeness:
  • Are all data sources specified with versions?
  • Are all tools and versions documented?
  • Is the procedure detailed enough for reproducibility?
  • Are all parameters explicitly stated?
• Write narrative text documenting the complete procedure
• Include subsections: Data, Tools, Procedure

For Results Section:

• Create placeholder structure
• Note: Results will be filled in after experiment execution
• Include guidance on:
  • Factual observations only (no interpretation)
  • Figure saving best practices (results/ directory)
  • Quality control documentation

For Discussion Section:

• Create placeholder structure with guidance
• Note: Discussion will be filled in after results are available
• Prepare structure for:
  • Interpretation
  • Hypothesis Evaluation
  • Limitations
  • Next Steps

Step 3: Template Customization

1. Copy appropriate template:
   • Jupyter: assets/templates/labnote-template.ipynb → notebook/labnote/Exp##_[title].ipynb
   • Markdown: assets/templates/labnote-template.md → notebook/labnote/Exp##_[title].md
2. Replace placeholders with the narrative content created through dialogue
3. Ensure all sections contain narrative text, not just TODO comments

Step 4: Post-Creation

1. Update notebook/tasks.md with new experiment entry
2. Inform user about:
   • Next steps (filling in results after execution)
   • Quality standards to maintain
   • When to return for discussion section completion

Naming convention:

Exp##_[brief-description].ext

Examples:
Exp01_rnaseq-differential-expression.ipynb
Exp02_protein-quantification.md
Exp03_pathway-enrichment.ipynb

Command: /research-exp

2. Notebook Structure Guidance

Guide users on proper notebook structure using references/notebook-guidelines.md.

Standard sections:

1. Header:

   • Experiment title (Exp##_[description])
   • Date
   • Experimenter name

2. Hypothesis:

   • Testable statement
   • Expected outcome

3. Background:

   • Context and rationale
   • Related experiments
   • References

4. Materials and Methods:

   • Data sources and versions
   • Tools and versions
   • Step-by-step procedure
   • Parameters

5. Results:

   • Observations (factual)
   • Figures and tables
   • Quality control checks

6. Discussion:

   • Interpretation
   • Hypothesis evaluation
   • Limitations
   • Next steps

3. Quality Checks

Ensure notebooks maintain scientific quality standards.

Key principles (from references/notebook-guidelines.md):

• Facts first: Results section = observations only
• Separate interpretation: Discussion section = analysis and reasoning
• Document everything: Include failed attempts and unexpected results
• Reproducibility: Complete procedure for replication
• Version control: Track changes with meaningful commits

Pre-finalization checklist:

• Hypothesis clearly stated
• Methods reproducible
• All parameters documented
• Figures properly labeled
• Results are factual observations
• Discussion separates facts from interpretation
• Limitations acknowledged
• Next steps identified

4. Integration with Workflow

Connect lab notebooks with broader project workflow.

Before creating notebook:

• Check STEERING.md for current phase and priorities
• Review notebook/tasks.md for planned experiments
• Ensure hypothesis aligns with research question

After completing experiment:

• CRITICAL: Engage in interactive dialogue to complete Results and Discussion sections
• Update notebook/tasks.md with status
• Consider if results warrant report generation (/research-report)
• Identify if hypothesis needs refinement (hypothesis-driven skill)
• Update STEERING.md if experiment completes a milestone

5. Post-Execution Checklist (MANDATORY)

When user returns after running the experiment, ask these questions to ensure complete documentation:

5.1 Observation Questions (ask all):

1. "What are the 3 most important observations from this experiment?"
2. "Were there any unexpected or surprising results?"
3. "Did anything differ from your initial expectations?"

5.2 Data & Artifact Questions: 4. "What figures/tables were generated? Please list with file paths." 5. "Where are the output files saved? (expected: results/exp##_*.{png,csv,etc})" 6. "What intermediate files should be preserved?"

5.3 Quality Control Questions: 7. "What QC checks were performed? (e.g., normalization, outlier detection)" 8. "Were there any anomalies, warnings, or errors during execution?" 9. "Did all samples/replicates pass QC?"

5.4 Deviation Questions: 10. "Did you deviate from the planned procedure? If so, document the changes." 11. "Were any parameters changed from the original plan?" 12. "Any failed attempts or troubleshooting steps to document?"

5.5 Forward-Looking Questions: 13. "Based on these results, what is the most logical next step?" 14. "Does this confirm, refute, or modify the original hypothesis?"

Use answers to fill Results and Discussion sections with narrative content.

---

6. Completing Results Section (Post-Checklist)

When user returns with experimental results, engage in interactive dialogue to document observations.

Workflow:

1. Review results with the user:
   • What were the key observations?
   • What figures/tables were generated?
   • What quality control checks were performed?
2. Guide factual documentation:
   • Ensure observations are stated factually (no interpretation)
   • Help structure results logically
   • Guide figure saving to results/ directory
3. Write narrative text documenting observations
4. Reference references/notebook-guidelines.md for Results section standards

Key principles:

• Results = observations only (Level 1 facts)
• No interpretation in Results section
• All figures must be saved and properly referenced
• Include quality control checks

7. Completing Discussion Section (Post-Checklist)

CRITICAL: The Discussion section must be created through interactive dialogue with the user. Do NOT fill with generic text.

Workflow:

6.1 Interpretation

• Engage in dialogue about what the results mean:
  • What do these observations mean biologically?
  • How do results relate to the original hypothesis?
  • How do results connect to literature?
  • What mechanistic explanations are plausible?
• Ask probing questions:
  • "What does this finding suggest about the biological process?"
  • "How does this relate to what we expected?"
  • "What alternative explanations could account for these results?"
• Write narrative text that synthesizes the dialogue into coherent interpretation
• Reference references/notebook-guidelines.md for interpretation standards

6.2 Hypothesis Evaluation

• Engage in dialogue to evaluate the original hypothesis:
  • Was the hypothesis supported, rejected, or inconclusive?
  • What evidence supports this conclusion?
  • Were there any unexpected findings?
• Write narrative text with explicit evaluation:
  • State original hypothesis
  • Present evaluation (supported/rejected/inconclusive)
  • Provide reasoning based on results

6.3 Limitations

• Engage in dialogue about constraints and caveats:
  • What are the limitations of this experiment?
  • What confounding variables were not controlled?
  • What are the generalizability constraints?
• Ask questions:
  • "What constraints might affect these conclusions?"
  • "What alternative explanations haven't been ruled out?"
  • "What are the limitations of the methods used?"
• Write narrative text acknowledging limitations honestly

6.4 Next Steps

• Engage in dialogue about follow-up experiments:
  • What questions remain unanswered?
  • What experiments would address these questions?
  • How do next steps build on current findings?
• Ask questions:
  • "What would be the most important follow-up experiment?"
  • "What question does this address?"
  • "How does this build on what we learned?"
• Write narrative text with specific, actionable next steps

Key principles:

• Discussion = interpretation and reasoning (Level 2 statements)
• Must be created through dialogue, not generic text
• Help user develop thoughtful analysis
• Ensure proper separation from Results (facts vs. interpretation)

Resources

assets/templates/

• labnote-template.ipynb: Jupyter notebook template for Python experiments
• labnote-template.md: Markdown template for non-Python experiments

commands/

• research-exp.md: New experiment creation command (/research-exp)

references/

• notebook-guidelines.md: Detailed guidelines for each notebook section

PDF Export

Export Jupyter notebooks to PDF using the provided shell script.

When to use: When user requests PDF output from a notebook.

Script location: scripts/notebook_to_pdf.sh

Usage:

# Basic export (output: Exp01_analysis.pdf)
/path/to/plugins/lab-notebook/scripts/notebook_to_pdf.sh Exp01_analysis.ipynb

# Custom output filename
/path/to/plugins/lab-notebook/scripts/notebook_to_pdf.sh Exp01_analysis.ipynb report.pdf

# Exclude code cells (output only)
/path/to/plugins/lab-notebook/scripts/notebook_to_pdf.sh --no-input Exp01_analysis.ipynb

# Keep intermediate markdown
/path/to/plugins/lab-notebook/scripts/notebook_to_pdf.sh --keep-md Exp01_analysis.ipynb

Workflow: .ipynb → .md (nbconvert) → .pdf (pandoc + typst)

Prerequisites: nbconvert, pandoc, typst

uv pip install nbconvert
brew install pandoc typst

Usage Notes

Format Selection

Use Jupyter (.ipynb) when:

• Experiment involves Python code
• Need inline visualization
• Require iterative analysis
• Want to execute code cells

Use Markdown (.md) when:

• Experiment is non-Python (e.g., command-line tools, R, manual procedures)
• Documentation-heavy with minimal code
• Prefer plain text format
• Simple version control

Best Practices

1. One experiment = One notebook

   • Don't combine multiple experiments in one file
   • Split large experiments into sub-experiments (Exp01a, Exp01b)

2. Sequential numbering

   • Exp01, Exp02, Exp03, ...
   • Don't reuse numbers
   • Gaps are OK (deleted experiments)

3. Descriptive titles

   • Good: Exp03_tcga-survival-analysis
   • Bad: Exp03_analysis or Exp03_test

4. Regular commits

   • Commit after each major step
   • Use meaningful messages
   • Don't commit huge result files (use .gitignore)

5. Document as you go

   • Don't wait until the end
   • Record observations immediately
   • Note unexpected findings

Common Workflow

Typical experiment workflow:

1. Planning:

   /research-status  # Check current priorities
   

2. Creation:

   /research-exp  # Create new notebook
   

3. Execution:

   • Run experiment
   • Document observations
   • Save results

4. Review:

   • Check quality standards
   • Update tasks.md

5. Follow-up:

   • Refine hypothesis if needed
   • Plan next experiment
   • Generate report if ready