Wiki

Wiki: Flow of connecting what you read to change

See everything from observation, proposal, execution, and isolation of external dependencies in one straight line

Mind Uploading Research Project

Public Page Updated: 2026-03-14 Reading to change workflow

How to use this page

Read this first to avoid getting lost

This page is a workflow guide for connecting the insights gained from reading Mind-Upload pages to actual changes and organization. When you find a new paper, notice a theoretical weakness, see the shape of a proposal, know a fix that can be fixed right away, or know that an external dependency is required, it will guide you in a straight line to which page to go back to and what to make.

  • Organize the flow of observation, theory organization, proposal, execution task, and external dependence in one page.
  • You don't have to stop at ``interesting'' or ``difficult to understand,'' you can decide which outcome to change to.
  • We will embody the premise of using public pages as portals, wikis for learning, and issues for execution.
Helpful next pages
Literature map Technical proposal Contribution Guide
Best for
People who are unsure about which page or task to return to after reading something
Reading time
8-12 minutes
Accuracy note
What is shown here is a workflow arrangement. To check the validity of individual proposals and papers, be sure to go back to the original page text and rationale.

Relatively clear at this stage

What we know now

  • If you decide which artifact to turn what you read into, information will be less scattered.
  • The page to return to is different for literature organization, theory organization, proposal, execution task, and external dependence.
  • Even when it comes to external dependencies, there are quite a few preparations that can be made in-house first.

Still unresolved beyond this point

What we still do not know

  • Which realization will lead to the greatest results will depend on the unresolved problems and implementation status at the time.
  • The extent to which the discussion of external dependence progresses to concrete cooperation depends on the other party and the conditions.

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.

Determine the next deliverable so that you don't just read it.

On this site, we do not leave behind what we read and understand. First, decide whether it is an attempt to organize the literature, a theoretical weakness, a suggestion, a fix that can be removed immediately, or an external dependency, and then decide where to return.

Basic flow

What I noticed after reading Back to What to make there
I found a new paper or evidence Research Harvest / Papers Connections to unsolved problems, evidence examples, wide archiving.
I found weaknesses in the theory and differences in assumptions Perspective / Idea Review of limits, theoretical framework, and design principles.
I could see the direction and policy to move forward Proposals Suggestions, stream organization, evidence links.
I can now see changes that can be fixed in this repository Issue Execution task, advance condition, refutation condition, modification position.
I realized that external collaboration and systems were necessary Collaborations External dependent tasks, in-house preparations, minimum deliverables.

How to tell where to put it back

Things to distinguish How to judge
Literature organization or proposal If you want to organize ``what has been learned,'' you should organize the literature, and if you want to show ``how to proceed,'' you should make a proposal.
Suggestion or Issue If it's a change that can be fixed in this repository right now, it's an issue, and if it's still in the planning stage, it's a suggestion.
Issue or Collaborations If you need a partner, an IRB, equipment, or a contract, call Collaborations, and if you can do without them, call Issues.
Public page or wiki If you want to show the main points and what is known/unknown, use the public page, and if you want to learn from the basics, use the wiki.

Common examples

Scene Back to Reason
I found a new EEG paper Research Harvest If you don't first sort out which U will be effective, it will tend to be scattered among proposals and issues.
After reading Perspective, I was concerned about the weaknesses of the theory Perspective / Idea It is better to leave it as a theoretical arrangement first, so that the premises of the proposal and implementation are less likely to deviate.
After reading the Proposals, I saw a deficiency that could be fixed immediately Issue This is the stage from organizing proposals to specific revisions and completion conditions.
When I tried to write an issue, there were too many external dependencies Collaborations This is because internal changes and external dependencies need to be separated.

Common ways to get lost

Mistake

  • Turn interesting literature into a proposal as it is: It is safer to return to unresolved issues and arranging issues first.
  • Write the immediate fixes on the suggestion page: It is better to separate the execution task into an issue so that it can have completion conditions.
  • Mixing external dependencies with issues: It is easy to get stuck if you do not separate internal changes and waiting for the other party.
  • Add all background information to the public page: It is better to post detailed explanations from the beginning to the wiki to maintain the entry point.

Where to return next

If you want to go back to the differences in the roles of pages, go back to Differences between facts, hypotheses, proposals, and execution tasks, go back to deciding where to put it Basics of deciding where to put new information, go back to the next page path for participation Five paths to follow after participation/collaboration page.