Use case
Preserve lab memory before it leaves with the next graduation
Keep decisions, methods, negative results, and lessons learned usable after students graduate and postdocs move on.
Who it is for
PIs and lab managers trying to reduce knowledge loss across turnover.
Why this matters
The paper may survive, but the reasoning behind parameter choices, failed attempts, and abandoned methods often lives in notes and people.
What it helps with
Recover why the lab made a prior decision.
Make negative results and abandoned approaches searchable.
Preserve continuity across cohorts and projects.
How a pilot would use it
- Upload theses, meeting notes, retrospectives, protocols, and key project documents.
- Ask what the lab tried, ruled out, or changed over time.
- Use citations to reconnect conclusions with their original context.
Example question
Why did we stop using build speed as the main control parameter?
The pilot found a build-speed relationship in one condition, but the process review showed the trend weakened under high heat input. The group moved to energy density plus thermal history as the reporting frame.
Trust and controls
- The system answers from the lab's own history, not public-web assumptions.
- Evidence gaps become visible instead of being smoothed over.
- Workspace boundaries keep project history scoped to authorized members.
Current Early Access limits and provider-mode disclosures are documented on the known limitations page.
Start with a focused lab corpus
The strongest pilot starts with documents your lab already trusts: protocols, core papers, theses, project notes, and recurring questions.