Week 37 — pilot or job process

This week delivers the three concrete artifacts below and the supporting learning/branding/opportunity pack. The scientific or commercial outcome follows the preserved source brief, while the acceptance checks make its evidence testable. The career objective is to turn this work into something a scientist, hiring manager or buyer can inspect.

• Scientific/build priority: Choose pilot delivery, job process, or a capacity-bounded combination from actual signed work and active interviews.
• Public/profile priority: Prepare a public technical learning note with confidentiality-safe content.
• Career/relationship/commercial priority: Apply the six-question culture filter to real opportunities, including priority ownership, workload, turnover and decision cadence.

Read v6 · Week 37 · Pilot delivery or job process before Monday. It expands this week's one-row v5 brief into daily build steps and adds the Welcome analogy, Learn it (▶ core and ＋ deeper sources), Run it (repos with a 20-40 minute exercise), the NotebookLM kit and the mentor check below. Standing v6 rules: resource rules, NotebookLM protocol, chapter anatomy. v6 adds depth only; it does not change a goal, gate, output or the 600-minute cap, so this specification still governs execution.

Act VIII · Threads: $, R · Next gate: 40

Where this week sits. - ← From: week 32 proposal, week 19/32 applications, v4 Part 3.3 culture filter. - → Feeds: week 39 (fund package can bundle pilots), week 40 (decision with real options). - ⟳ Returns in: income and offers in the final retro.

Goals. - 🎯 This week: a pilot running with a weekly readout or an interview process active with at least one scientific-data company. - 🏁 Next milestone: Gate 40. - 🌟 Final: a real choice at week 40, not a hypothetical one.

The plan (from v5 Part 7, expanded; gate and output unchanged).

v5 row: 37 | Pilot delivery or job process | Client or interview prep | Pilot (6-8 weeks) running, or interviews at scientific-data companies with three preprints | Weekly client readout - Goal: one concrete path is moving. - Tue (study): client domain reading or interview preparation (system design for scientific data, your papers as case studies). - Build: [ ] Mon: pilot kickoff (success metric agreed, baseline measured) or interview prep (3 STAR stories per preprint). [ ] Wed: pilot data pipeline on client infrastructure (on-prem if needed) or technical interview practice. [ ] Fri: first weekly readout (one page: metric, change, blockers, next week) or interview debrief with the culture filter scored. - Sun: private reflection in LOG.md; public post only about general lessons. - Only one thing: the first weekly readout (or the culture-filter score after the first interview).

Mentor check. "I have a real option in motion, and I am evaluating it as carefully as it is evaluating me."

• Week 30: inspect its actual evidence and review; source/code artifacts must exist before the dependent task begins.
• Week 32: inspect its actual evidence and review; source/code artifacts must exist before the dependent task begins.
• Week 36: inspect its actual evidence and review; source/code artifacts must exist before the dependent task begins.
• Read commitment, evidence, review and the current root TODAY/PROGRESS/QUESTIONS files.
• Read this week's chapter, v6 · Week 37 · Pilot delivery or job process, then the standing sections: Part 0 · how to use the document, Part 3 · the scientific thesis, Part 4 · curriculum, Part 8 · the prompt pack and Part 9 · branding and endorsement. The same sections exist in the v5 master, which remains the governing sequence; v6 reproduces them and adds depth. Retained commercial/instrument details come from v4.
• Inspect the actual canonical repository state, available data, existing figures and required human/external inputs. Never assume a previous week succeeded from its folder name.
• Verify current resource links, versions, dataset rights and any live company/venue information before relying on them. Use source catalog; explicitly record inaccessible resources.

The model must turn these into exact physical actions using the observed files and available inputs. Each 90-minute block includes start/stop rituals. All calls, posts, debugging, reading and exercises consume this same capacity.

Half 2: Tuesday is the formal study block unless this is a selling/submission/decision week. Thursday supports applied review, partner work or the market task; do not add another full course.

Biology/domain unit

Material: Study only the client's immediate scientific workflow or the actual job description/interview topic.

Produce: One concise applied note, a worked decision/example and unresolved questions.

Understanding check: The note directly supports this week's experiment, collaboration, delivery or career action.

During preparation, write one worked example connected to the week's actual task, one exercise with a separate answer key and five questions. Peter supplies answers; score explanation quality and flag misconceptions in QUESTIONS. Numeric/scientific conclusions require actual data or explicitly synthetic teaching values.

AI/scientific-method unit

Material: Rehearse the pilot readout or technical interview using current evidence; last 30 minutes: company/lab paper where relevant.

Produce: One concise applied note, a worked decision/example and unresolved questions.

Understanding check: The note directly supports this week's experiment, collaboration, delivery or career action.

Use the prompt pack: P1 explanation ladder, P2 concept-to-project bridge and P3 quiz. Coding practice belongs within the allocated study/build block. Where the source asks for a favorable scientific result, substitute an honest measured comparison as explained below.

Founder/scientist paper

Select one verified founder/scientific-lead paper relevant to this week's domain. Use P11; save the question, method, numerical result with context, data workflow, three author questions and one connection sentence in founder-paper.md. Keep abstract-only access limitations explicit. On source weeks with no study, prioritize the commercial/submission task and log any skipped digest.

These filenames are outputs to prepare during this week's execution; this scaffold does not claim they already exist. Drafts and measured results have different states. Technical code/data stay in the canonical project repository and are referenced from these coordinating files.

During preparation, future measured tables get column definitions, input requirements and run instructions with PENDING status. During execution, replace pending values only with measured outputs. Do not create realistic-looking fake evidence.

Branding: Prepare a public technical learning note with confidentiality-safe content.

Opportunity action: Apply the six-question culture filter to real opportunities, including priority ownership, workload, turnover and decision cadence.

Use career asset contracts. Publish at most the agreed cadence; one figure and one supported number or admitted failure can support multiple drafts. In long-form weeks, prepare a 1,500–2,500-word article from existing evidence within the build/buffer allocation. In release/demo weeks, prepare a 60-second script: problem, input, command/action, result, limitation and proof link.

Verify individuals, jobs and affiliations at execution time. The GridX list and v4 company map are research seeds, not current facts. Do not reveal named company weaknesses or employer/client confidential information. Keep drafted/sent/replied/booked/held statuses separate. The planning request alone does not authorize external messages or publication; honor explicit authorization in the execution session.

A six-to-eight-week pilot starting at week 37 extends to weeks 42–44. Week 40 is a decision checkpoint, not an invented pilot completion date.

Apply the root scientific evidence contract: provenance; meaningful independent splits; no future-data leakage; baseline comparison; actual denominators/uncertainty; failed cases; human review where required. State whether data are simulated, public experimental, synthetic or partner-provided.

Keep source gates intact, and log scope/time conflicts in review. Missing people, money, access or results must not be replaced with invented evidence. Reduce optional polish first. A specific essential external dependency stays pending while independent preparation continues.

This is an enabling week. Its deliverables feed the next scheduled gate: 40. Complete the acceptance checklist below; do not promote reputation from a draft.

• Monday artifact satisfies: Produce one client readout or tailored research interview presentation for an actual opportunity, with the next milestone dated.
• Wednesday artifact satisfies: One executable workplan fits the selected branch and documented capacity.
• Friday artifact satisfies: Completed actions and next milestones have evidence and dates.
• Study pack is prepared; Peter's actual learning/quiz result is recorded separately.
• Branding and opportunity drafts use supported claims and the correct external-action state.
• Reproduction or document checks are recorded with file/version references.
• This week's special gate, if any, has real evidence or remains explicitly pending.
• Review, root progress/log and the next physical action are updated.

Expanded minimum derived from the source goal: Produce one client readout or tailored research interview presentation for an actual opportunity, with the next milestone dated.

Operational first step if stalled: open engagement-branch.md, write the required inputs and produce the smallest checkable example in ten minutes. If a more urgent missing gate dependency controls the week, use the source minimum above.

If the full week does not fit, use P14: retain one gate-critical deliverable and one directly supporting study exercise; record what is skipped versus moved. Do not mark the original full gate passed merely because the minimum was completed. After a missed week, reforecast from actual evidence and avoid a second unexamined lost week.

In review, state exactly what exists, what was verified, what Peter can now explain, which external events remain pending, where the canonical code/data live, and the next file/function or draft paragraph to touch. Link each fact to evidence. Carry scientific assumptions, split definitions and rights constraints forward explicitly.

Prepare Week 37 of this LABLOOP execution plan.
Read execution-plan/specs.md, execution-plan/DECISIONS.md,
execution-plan/GATES.md and
execution-plan/weeks/week-37-pilot-or-job-process/specs.md, commitment.md, evidence.md and review.md.
Read prior prerequisite reviews and inspect actual repository/data state.
Use v5 as the governing sequence, the v6 Week 37 chapter
(LABLOOP-Master-Plan-v6.md) as the deeper walkthrough, and v4 only for
retained details.
Produce the full local preparation pack and the exact week-specific files named
in the artifact table. Give me a bounded lesson with exercises/answer key,
daily physical actions, technical runbook or draft, branding drafts and
career/commercial actions. Keep the total to 600 minutes.
Separate prepared artifacts from measured results and my learning completion.
Verify sources and do not invent metrics, citations, papers, people or outcomes.
Do not execute external communications, publication or spending unless the
current session already authorizes the specific action.
Finish by updating evidence/review and TODAY with the next physical action.

v6 expands this row into a full brief, with the gate and output unchanged, inside v6 · Week 37 · Pilot delivery or job process. The following is source planning text, not a claim of completion. Apply the explicit evidence corrections in this specification and DECISIONS.md.