Students and researchers

Goal: Build a small research notebook that separates a source observation, your interpretation, and the next question.

Before you start: Complete your first workspace and select a workspace where you are an editor or owner. This exercise uses the theme Research practice; creating another workspace is optional. You can complete all core steps without an AI connection.

Practice data

The content below is an invented exercise, not real research findings, customer interviews, approved business policies, or student records. Check rights and sharing scope when you replace it with real material.

Start with a question you keep losing track of

You have a paper PDF, a lecture slide deck, a passage from a primary source, and notes from last week. When you start a report, you remember the conclusion but cannot find the passage that supports it. This guide turns that pile into a reading notebook you can check and extend.

The practice question is “What study conditions help me avoid interruptions?” The small example below uses personal observations. For a real literature review, replace those observations with permitted papers and primary sources, keeping the same separation between evidence and interpretation.

Give each kind of material a clear home

Material	Put it in	Record and check
Paper, primary-source export, lecture slides	Library	Author, title, date, page or slide number; check extracted text against the original
Your reading summary	Reading note in Context	What the source says, your interpretation, limitations, and a source link
Comparison across readings	A table in Research question	Agreement, disagreement, and unanswered questions
Next reading or observation	Study plan in Context	What to inspect next and how you will record it

A source being Ready means processing finished, not that its argument is correct. A scanned PDF may remain Original stored or have no usable text; add a short, checked transcription in your reading note. Keep page references even when search finds the passage.

Page links in this example

Research question links to Reading note and Study plan using wikilinks. The arrows show page relationships to create, not an automatic workflow or a product screen.

Create the three practice pages

1. Open Context → New Context page. Use the first two copyable templates below, entering each page title in the title field and its Markdown in the body.
2. For each page, choose Save draft, wait for saving, then Publish. This publishes for workspace readers; Publish to web is separate.
3. Create Research question last, using the third template. Its [[Page title]] links must match existing page titles in this workspace.
4. Open both links. If one does not resolve, check its title and workspace and select the existing target with the editor’s Wikilink command.

Markdown is ordinary text with headings and lists; these templates are notes, not software code. See Context pages and images and links for editing controls.

A reading session and a weekly synthesis

While reading: keep an evidence trail

1. Open Library → Upload and add a permitted paper or lecture file. Open its item, check Status, and compare one important passage or formula with the original. If the conversion loses a symbol or table column, refer to the original and write the missing detail yourself.
2. Open Context → New Context page, or edit Reading note. Record the source title, author, date, and page or slide. Label an exact quotation as a quotation; put your interpretation under a separate heading.
3. Choose Save draft and check the saved status. Before Publish, verify that “the source observed X” has not silently become “X always causes Y.”

For several sources, add a comparison table to Research question. These are practice entries, not published findings:

Source	Reported or observed	My interpretation	Limitation or question
Reading note, practice days 1–2	Fewer interruptions were recorded	Moving a phone may help me	No comparison condition
Lecture note, slide 8	Instructor described several distraction factors	Phone location is only one candidate	Check the underlying primary source

At the end of the week: decide what to check next

Open Search, select Scope → Context, and search for Research question. Open both linked pages and update the comparison table. Put an unresolved contradiction in Study plan as a question, rather than smoothing it into a confident conclusion. Publish the checked updates, then open History to confirm which revision readers receive.

Math and code can stay in your notes as text or fenced code for explanation. Preserve notation, units, software version, and the source of a calculation; check the reading view before relying on formatting. dtxWiki does not execute the code or reproduce an analysis from a pasted snippet. Use your normal analysis tools and reference manager for execution and bibliography formatting.

Copy the page content

Create the pages in this order. Put each heading’s page title in the title field and paste the block below it into the body.

Reading note

# Reading note

## Source
Practice observation recorded by me; not a published study.

## What I observed
On two practice days, I put my phone in another room while studying.

## Interpretation
I felt less distracted, but this does not establish a causal effect.

## Limits
Only one person, two days, and no comparison condition.

Study plan

# Study plan

## Next observation
Compare a quiet desk session and a normal desk session.

## Record each time
- Session length
- Number of interruptions
- How focused I felt

## Keep separate
Write observations first and interpretations afterward.

Research question

# Research question

## Question
What study conditions help me avoid interruptions?

## Starting material
[[Reading note]]

## Next step
[[Study plan]]

## Open questions
- Does session length change the result?
- What other causes might explain the observation?

## Confidence
Exploratory personal notes; no general conclusion yet.

Work with a supervisor or reading group

An Owner can add members with the appropriate roles. A Viewer can read published notes; an Editor can help check and update them. Share the workspace page link with members and ask a concrete question: “Does this paragraph distinguish the paper’s result from my interpretation?”

Save draft keeps browser editing private; it is not a request for review. When an explicit proposal is in Review queue, an authorized Editor or Owner can open it, use View changes when available, and Request changes with a reason such as “add the page number.” Human Editors can also publish directly. Agree on who checks quotations before publication; do not assume the software assigns an academic supervisor.

If a paper is corrected, use Upload new version on its Library item. Compare the changed passage, update Reading note, and explain the effect on Research question. The Context summary does not update automatically. Record the correction reason in the note and inspect History so a collaborator can understand why the conclusion changed.

Check the result

You can navigate from the research question to the observation and study plan, and immediately see why the observation cannot support a general claim.

Use Search to find Research question again. Check the published content and open both links; a successful draft save alone does not confirm that readers have the new version.

Ask a reading partner to check these concrete outcomes:

• From Research question, they can open the source summary and next-step plan without searching elsewhere.
• Each important claim has a source location, a clearly marked interpretation, or an explicit “not known yet.”
• They can explain why the two practice days are insufficient for a general claim, and find the next observation you intend to make.

Common mistakes to avoid

Mistake	Better approach
Keeping only an AI summary	Retain permitted originals and verify quotations in them
Treating a lecture slide as the primary finding	Follow its reference and record what you have actually checked
Replacing an uncertain claim with confident wording	Keep the limitation beside the claim and add a follow-up question
Uploading a revised paper and assuming the report changed	Update and publish the affected Context pages deliberately

Start with one question and a few sources. Add further linked reading notes as the project grows, instead of creating a large taxonomy before your first useful summary.

Related guides: Library, review and history, and sharing.

Optional: ask a connected AI tool

Complete MCP connections and grant only the required workspace and reading access. Credential grants and workspace permissions enforce access. Material returned to an external AI app may be processed by its provider; use approved, non-sensitive practice data.

Find and read Research question, Reading note, and Study plan in my selected workspace. Make a table with: observed or quoted evidence, source location, my interpretation, limitation, and next check. Mark missing locations and unsupported claims as unknown. Suggest three next-reading questions; do not invent papers, citations, or experimental results. Reply in this chat only, without editing dtxWiki.

Check the AI table against the original passage, including units and mathematical symbols. Confirm that suggested readings are real in your normal literature-search tools. Move only checked wording into Context yourself; the AI response is not a verified literature review or a finished bibliography.

Chats lets you inspect recorded dtxWiki tool activity. It is not a complete transcript of the AI conversation or a record of every action in the external service.

Version evidence: Library controls, page editing and publication, review decisions.