Research synthesis
Synthesis is not summarizing sources one after another. It is answering the
question with claims you can defend, each traceable to evidence.
Method
- Sharpen the question first. "What should we know about X?" becomes
"Does X do Y under condition Z, and at what cost?" A precise question
makes relevance decidable; a vague one makes everything relevant and
nothing conclusive.
- Gather with hostility toward your first answer. Search for the
claim and its negation. Prefer primary sources (the paper, the spec,
the changelog, the benchmark) over commentary about them; note each
source's date and incentive: a vendor's benchmark and an academic's
are different evidence.
- Extract claims, not paragraphs. From each source pull the specific
assertions relevant to the question, each tagged with its source and
whether it is measured, reported, or opined.
- Reconcile before writing. Where sources agree, the claim strengthens.
Where they conflict, say so and adjudicate: newer data, better
methodology, closer to primary: or declare it genuinely unsettled.
A synthesis that hides its conflicts is an advertisement.
- Write the answer in three layers:
- The answer: two or three sentences, direct, first.
- The evidence: the claims that support it, each attributed ("per the
v2 spec...", "the 2025 benchmark found...").
- The edges: what is uncertain, contested, or unknown, and what
evidence would settle it.
- Mark inference as inference. When you bridge a gap ("A implies
likely B"), flag it: "this is inference, not stated by any source."
Readers can weigh a marked inference; an unmarked one is contamination.
Rules
- No claim without a source; no source without a date-awareness check
(is this still true?).
- Absence of evidence gets said plainly: "none of the reviewed sources
address this."
- Quantities beat qualities: "3× slower on the 10k-row case" over "much
slower", whenever the source gives numbers.
- The confidence of your prose must track the strength of your evidence.
One blog post earns "one report suggests", never "it is known".
Litmus test
Could a skeptical reader, given only your synthesis, locate the exact
source for every load-bearing claim: and would the two or three sentences
at the top survive them checking?
1---2name: research-synthesis3description: Turn multiple sources into a defensible, source-attributed answer that separates fact from inference. Use when researching a question across documents, articles, or search results.4---56# Research synthesis78Synthesis is not summarizing sources one after another. It is answering the9question with claims you can defend, each traceable to evidence.1011## Method12131. **Sharpen the question first.** "What should we know about X?" becomes14 "Does X do Y under condition Z, and at what cost?" A precise question15 makes relevance decidable; a vague one makes everything relevant and16 nothing conclusive.172. **Gather with hostility toward your first answer.** Search for the18 claim *and* its negation. Prefer primary sources (the paper, the spec,19 the changelog, the benchmark) over commentary about them; note each20 source's date and incentive: a vendor's benchmark and an academic's21 are different evidence.223. **Extract claims, not paragraphs.** From each source pull the specific23 assertions relevant to the question, each tagged with its source and24 whether it is measured, reported, or opined.254. **Reconcile before writing.** Where sources agree, the claim strengthens.26 Where they conflict, say so and adjudicate: newer data, better27 methodology, closer to primary: or declare it genuinely unsettled.28 A synthesis that hides its conflicts is an advertisement.295. **Write the answer in three layers:**30 - *The answer*: two or three sentences, direct, first.31 - *The evidence*: the claims that support it, each attributed ("per the32 v2 spec...", "the 2025 benchmark found...").33 - *The edges*: what is uncertain, contested, or unknown, and what34 evidence would settle it.356. **Mark inference as inference.** When you bridge a gap ("A implies36 likely B"), flag it: "this is inference, not stated by any source."37 Readers can weigh a marked inference; an unmarked one is contamination.3839## Rules4041- No claim without a source; no source without a date-awareness check42 (is this still true?).43- Absence of evidence gets said plainly: "none of the reviewed sources44 address this."45- Quantities beat qualities: "3× slower on the 10k-row case" over "much46 slower", whenever the source gives numbers.47- The confidence of your prose must track the strength of your evidence.48 One blog post earns "one report suggests", never "it is known".4950## Litmus test5152Could a skeptical reader, given only your synthesis, locate the exact53source for every load-bearing claim: and would the two or three sentences54at the top survive them checking?