Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://hubify.com/docs/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
Houston Method v2
Every experiment that finishes, pass or fail, triggers a mandatory 9-step completion loop. Running the script is Step 1 of 9. Here is what the full protocol requires and why each step exists.Why This Exists
“There must be more experiments. Do not accept ‘complete’ easily.”A script finishing is not a result. A result without cross-matching is not science. Science without site/paper updates is wasted work. The Houston Method enforces a loop that pushes every research path as far as it can go before marking anything complete.
The 9-Step Loop
Step 1: RUN
Execute the computation. Save raw outputs (parquet, JSON, FITS, CSV, figures). Nothing else counts until the raw output exists.Step 2: QC Gate
Automated checks run immediately after the experiment finishes.| Check | Failure Condition |
|---|---|
| Null coordinates | >5% of top anomalies at RA=0, Dec=0 |
| Training quality | val_loss > 1,000 or no convergence |
| Cluster degeneracy | >80% of objects in a single cluster |
| Score explosion | max(anomaly_score) > 10^6 |
| Spatial concentration | All top 20 anomalies within 5° radius |
| Empty output | 0 anomalies found |
| NaN/Inf values | Any NaN or Inf in scores or coordinates |
needs-rerun, add a re-run task with the specific fix, move to the next experiment. Do not proceed to Step 3.
Step 3: ANALYZE
Scientific analysis of the results.- Cross-match top 100 anomalies against SIMBAD (2”), NED (5”), and survey-specific VizieR catalogs
- Compute novelty fraction (% not in any catalog)
- Spatial distribution, clustered (astrophysical) or uniform (instrumental)?
- Score distribution, log-normal (physical) or power-law with cutoff (systematic)?
- Classify anomaly types: QSO, star, galaxy, artifact, unknown
Step 4: INTERPRET
Connect the result to the science.- Does this improve the f_NL constraint?
- Does this test the birefringence prediction (β = 0.27°)?
- Does this constrain the NANOGrav GW spectrum (γ = 3.0)?
- Does this support or challenge the quintom w-crossing (w₀ + wₐ < −1)?
- Does this open a new observational channel for bounce cosmology?
Step 5: CONNECT
How does this result relate to the rest of the program?- Cross-reference with every other completed survey
- Update the bounce cosmology portfolio table (which channels strengthened/weakened?)
- Update the f_NL sensitivity forecast (did σ improve?)
- Check if any paper drafts need updates based on this finding
Step 6: SYNC
Update all affected website pages and paper drafts within 24 hours. Pages that always need updating after any experiment:activity.html, status.html. Then check data-explorer.html, figures.html, paper.html, index.html, explained.html, and the relevant articles.
The rule: if a number, claim, or figure appears on any page and the underlying data changed, that page must be updated. Use grep to find all occurrences of changed values.
In Hubify, this means updating the relevant figures, papers, and activity feed in your lab.
Step 7: EXPAND
Generate new tasks from this result. Every experiment should produce 5–15 new tasks. Task types to generate:- Cross-match tasks, one per other survey (N×N matrix)
- Deeper analysis, download spectra, detailed classification for top anomalies
- Runs on the runs, UMAP clustering, emission line extraction, photo-z estimation
- Architecture variants, re-run with transformer/VAE/contrastive if results are promising
- New dataset search, search for newly released public datasets (arxiv, survey calendars)
- Advanced simulations, MCMC or numerical simulation to refine theoretical predictions
- Paper integration, draft/update task if publishable
- Follow-up observation, prepare target list if discovery candidate
Step 8: BACKUP
Results must exist in 3+ locations before marking complete.scpresults to local diskgit add + commit + push(auto-deploys the lab site)- Every 5 experiments: backup to Backblaze B2
- Every 10 experiments: upload model artifacts to HuggingFace
- Write
checkpoint.jsonwith full experiment metadata
Step 9: COMPLETE
Only after steps 1–8 are done. Mark the experiment complete everywhere:complete, logs the completion to the activity feed, and triggers the site update hook.
Anti-Patterns
| What happened | Why it is not complete |
|---|---|
| Script finished running | That is Step 1 of 9 |
| Results saved to disk | That is Step 8 of 9 (backup only, not analysis) |
| “COMPLETE” badge added | Badge without QC is a lie |
| Anomaly count reported | Count without classification is meaningless |
| Cross-match done against one catalog | Need SIMBAD + NED + VizieR minimum |
| ”Null result” reported | What does the null result open? (Step 4) |
| No new tasks generated | Think harder (Step 7) |
Using the Houston Method in Hubify
The orchestrator applies this protocol automatically after every experiment QC pass:- Research Lead runs Steps 3–4 (analysis + interpretation)
- Paper Lead checks Steps 5–6 (connect + sync papers)
- Orchestrator runs Step 7 (generates queue expansion tasks)
- Backup agent runs Step 8
- Captain reviews Step 9 in the Discoveries view