For answers that must be more than a vibe: source fragments, repo context, vault notes, web facts, and tool output collapse into one defensible conclusion.
Methodology / Synthesis
Source-backed Synthesis
A framework for turning scattered sources into a grounded conclusion with provenance, confidence, and follow-up gaps.
Collect→Anchor→Compare→Synthesize→Trace
How it works
Start with source anchors, separate observations from interpretation, name uncertainty, then preserve provenance so the conclusion can be audited later.
A conclusion with citations/provenance, confidence level, known gaps, and the smallest next action to improve the evidence.
Operating guide
Best for conclusions that combine multiple inputs without losing where each claim came from: repo files, vault notes, screenshots, web sources, and tool output.
Collect bounded sources, separate observations from interpretation, compare conflicts, synthesize the smallest stable conclusion, and keep provenance close to the claim.
A decision note can say which repo files were inspected, which live URLs were checked, what changed since the prior version, and which uncertainty remains.
The method fails when it blends source facts and interpretation, overweights memory, or produces a confident conclusion that cannot be traced back to inspected evidence.
What you get
The minimum output is a conclusion, source anchors, confidence, conflicts, gaps, and the next exact evidence-gathering step. The reader should be able to trace each strong claim back to an inspected input.
Taxonomy boundary
Related shelf: Guides can teach the workflow in long form; this page stays the compact framework for source-grounded conclusions.