Loop audit offer and pipeline

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: Rewrite the Loop Audit one-pager with scope, two-week effort assumptions, three candidates, one prototype and two preprints as proof.
• Public/profile priority: Draft offer announcement grounded in evidence; update About to include audit clients and continue a distinct recruiter CTA.
• Career/relationship/commercial priority: Compare employment and consulting signals using the v4 culture filter; commercial outreach does not replace active applications.

Read v6 · Week 27 · Loop Audit offer, built on papers 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 VI · Threads: $, R · Next gate: 28

Where this week sits. - ← From: v4 Part 4 (offers, pricing hypotheses), Part 9.3 ladder (founders at rungs 4-6), weeks 1-26 (all proof). - → Feeds: week 28 (first invoice), week 29-30 (delivery), week 32 (second audit or pilot proposal), week 39 (fund package), week 40 (decision). - ⟳ Returns in: every commercial conversation for the rest of your career: the one-pager evolves, the logic stays.

Goals. - 🎯 This week: offer one-pager rewritten with preprints as proof; sent to 10 (5 founders who engaged, 3 established companies, 2 funds); 3 calls booked. - 🏁 Next milestone: Gate 28 (first invoice, any amount). - 🌟 Final: a sustainable consulting practice or a fractional role (week 40 decision).

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

v5 row: 27 | Loop Audit offer, built on papers | v4 Part 4 offers, re-read | Offer one-pager rewritten with the two preprints as proof; sent to 10 (5 founders who engaged, 3 established companies, 2 funds) | 3 calls booked - Goal: three conversations about a paid audit. - Tue (study): re-read v4 Part 4 (offers and "sell weeks, not savings"), v4 Template F (one-pager) and The Mom Test chapters 1-3. - Build: Mon: one-pager v2: problem in the client's words, what the audit delivers, two weeks, fixed price hypothesis, proof (two preprints, instruments, DOIs), what it does not do. Done when a founder friend reads it in 60 seconds and repeats it back. Wed: 10 personalised messages (Part 9.6 template adapted). Done when sent and logged in OPPORTUNITIES.csv. Fri: discovery-call script (10 questions, Mom-Test style: past behaviour, not opinions) and a scoping sheet. Done when both fit on one page each. - Sun: L-Sun: the offer, stated plainly, with the proof links. - Only one thing: the 10 messages sent.

Mentor check. "I can explain the Loop Audit in 30 seconds without the word AI, and three people want to talk about it."

• Week 20: inspect its actual evidence and review; source/code artifacts must exist before the dependent task begins.
• Week 25: inspect its actual evidence and review; source/code artifacts must exist before the dependent task begins.
• Week 26: 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 27 · Loop Audit offer, built on papers, 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.

Biology/domain unit

Material: Re-read v4 Part 4 and section 9.7; convert one scientific result into a bounded audit deliverable and one buyer question.

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: Apply the culture filter and proposal economics to real leads; rehearse discovery. Last 30 minutes: a qualified prospect's scientific paper.

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.

Branding: Draft offer announcement grounded in evidence; update About to include audit clients and continue a distinct recruiter CTA.

Opportunity action: Compare employment and consulting signals using the v4 culture filter; commercial outreach does not replace active applications.

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.

Prices are inherited hypotheses, not market facts. Flag that a 20-hour audit consumes two entire 10-hour weeks; scope and delivery dates must reflect Paper 3 commitments.

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: 28. Complete the acceptance checklist below; do not promote reputation from a draft.

• Monday artifact satisfies: Finish the fixed-scope Loop Audit one-pager and personalized follow-ups for the three strongest qualified leads.
• Wednesday artifact satisfies: Every recipient has a verified role, relevant proof and a clear small ask.
• Friday artifact satisfies: Current opportunities have owner, next action/date and delivery-capacity estimate.
• 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: Finish the fixed-scope Loop Audit one-pager and personalized follow-ups for the three strongest qualified leads.

Operational first step if stalled: open loop-audit-offer.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 27 of this LABLOOP execution plan.
Read execution-plan/specs.md, execution-plan/DECISIONS.md,
execution-plan/GATES.md and
execution-plan/weeks/week-27-loop-audit-offer-and-pipeline/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 27 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 27 · Loop Audit offer, built on papers. The following is source planning text, not a claim of completion. Apply the explicit evidence corrections in this specification and DECISIONS.md.