Wiki

Wiki: How to read the literature and evidence page

Don't confuse 'many papers' with 'strong conclusions'

Mind Uploading Research Project

Public Page Updated: 2026-03-26 Reading guide

How to use this page

Read this first to avoid getting lost

This page is an auxiliary page that organizes the roles of the literature pages on Mind-Upload. The more papers there are on a page, the more difficult it is to read if the roles are mixed up, so this guide first explains ``what the page does'' and ``to what extent it should not be treated as definitive.''

  • The collection of papers is the gateway to a wide range of information, the literature map is the organization of unresolved issues, and the proposal page is the integration of implementation policies.
  • This is an aid to avoid reading the number of papers, number of citations, and status labels as the strength of the conclusion.
  • It tells you where to stop and how far to go back to the original text.
  • When pursuing primary evidence in the technical and natural sciences, it is safer to go through the priority route within the collection rather than the chronological order.
  • For technical reading, observability-class advances should be kept separate from demos, direct validators, and hidden-state boundary papers.
  • For living-human measurement papers, proxy-rich / same-subject / multimodal wording should be routed through proxy composition and common-driver checks before it is read as state closure.
Helpful next pages
Literature map Collection of papers Technical proposal
Best for
People who have difficulty understanding the difference between a collection of papers and a bibliographic map, or who are confused about which page to enter.
Reading time
8-12 minutes
Accuracy note
This page is a reading aid. Please be sure to return to the original page and original paper to check the evaluation of individual papers and individual proposals.

Relatively clear at this stage

What we know now

  • Separating pages with different roles makes it difficult to confuse volume with strength of conclusion.
  • The purpose of reading the collection of papers, bibliography map, and proposal page is different.
  • Important decisions should be made by going back to the original paper or page, not the summary.
  • A human measurement paper often changes what is observable, not what is already solved.
  • A same-subject or multimodal human paper can still be a proxy-composition problem rather than a same-state result.

Still unresolved beyond this point

What we still do not know

  • Which paper will ultimately remain as the central basis may change in the future.
  • States such as source_logged may be updated on subsequent scrutiny.

Learn the basics

Check the basics in the wiki

What the wiki is for

The wiki is a learning aid. For the project's official current synthesis, success criteria, and operating rules, always return to the public pages.

First, separate roles

Not all literature pages have the same role. By separating the pages that collect broadly, the pages that organize by unresolved problems, and the pages that integrate as proposals, we make it difficult for readers to lose track of what they are currently looking at.

When you want to decide the next page after reading the literature

If you want to see not only the difference in roles but also where to go back to unresolved problems, proposals, issues, and collaboration candidates after reading papers and literature maps, please see The straight path from literature to implementation and participation.

When you want to follow only the primary evidence of technology/natural science

Collection of Papers is a broad archive, so the first chronological order does not necessarily correspond to technological frontier order. If you want to see technical routes such as decode, speech neuroprosthesis, ESI direct validation, human observability, and maintenance-state first, please enter from the Technology / Natural Science Priority Route in the collection of papers.

When you see a new human measurement paper

Ask first whether the paper is a demo, a direct validator, an observability-class advance, or a hidden-state boundary paper. That one question blocks a common scientific overread: "humans measured more, therefore hidden state is almost closed."

When the paper sounds like living-human whole-brain state measurement

Do not stop at "same-subject", "multimodal", or "proxy-rich". Return next to Wiki: Human Proxy Composition and Route Maturity and Wiki: Measurement-stack observability and claim ceilings. On this site, the practical question is narrower: what did each row directly observe, what common-driver or vascular/autonomic route could still move with it, and what hidden-state family remains outside calibration?

Differences between the three pages

Page Role What to do here Things not to do here
Collection of papers Wide entrance The flow by year, existence of related papers, and guesses from the abstracts. Technical readers enter key primary sources through the preferred route. Confirm the final evaluation of each paper only here.
Bibliography map Organization by unresolved issues See what is solved and what is unsolved for each U number. The strength of a conclusion is determined by the number of citations alone.
Technical proposal Integration of implementation strategies Keep track of which proposals are out there, what state they are in, and what impact they have. Acceptance of the proposal should be read as implementation completion.

How deep should you read

What you're looking at You can stop on the spot Return to original text
Thesis card When you realize that your point is far from yours. When you want to use methods, evaluations, and limitations as evidence.
Current U number map When you know which U is relevant to you. When you want to check whether the literature really works for that U.
Proposal summary table When the streams and state involved are known. When you want to judge acceptance or rejection or validity.

Five rules to prevent misreading

Rule

  • Don't confuse quantity with strength: The number of papers and citations is not the same as establishing a conclusion.
  • Don't stop at the summary: Always go back to the DOI or original text when using it as evidence.
  • Do not misread status labels: source_logged, proposal accepted, and document reflected each have different meanings.
  • Do not collapse observability into sufficiency: A new human proxy or atlas can raise what is observable without proving state-complete measurement.
  • Do not collapse proxy-rich into state-closed: Same-subject or multimodal human rows still need proxy-class, calibrator-role, and common-driver checks.
When you want to check the meaning of Scopus / arXiv / source_logged first

This page is a supplementary page that explains the role differences. If you want to organize publication source, document type, site status, and evidence class on a single page, look first at Wiki: How to read source types, status labels, and evidence classes, and the way the collection of papers and bibliographic maps will look will stabilize.

Where to go back next

If you want to view a wide range of papers, please go back to Paper Collection, if you want to start with unsolved problems, go to Literature Map, and if you want to follow proposals and implementation policies, go back to Technical Proposal.

If the paper is a living-human measurement paper that sounds close to whole-brain state measurement, go next to Human Proxy Composition and Route Maturity before promoting it in your head from "observability-class advance" to "state-identification evidence."