← Explore examplesPublic example workspace

Research notebook

Follow the evidence to the Moon.

Source-backed example · NASA pages checked 10-05-2026

Give this to my AI
Lunar investigation · evidence note 01NASA · corrected 10-02-2026
Astronaut on the lunar surface during Apollo 11
NASA Apollo 11 / AS11-40-5874 · historical context, not an image of the new investigation
EstablishedThree payload suites selected

NASA’s announcement describes future investigations into resources, shelter potential and hazards. [1]

Still to establishResearch results

Selection is a plan. Completed measurements and independent review are not part of this record.

Correction retained in the record

NASA’s 10-02 editor’s note corrects the full names of DISCO and GIMLI. Cite the revised release and keep the correction date. View chronology ↓

Your briefingPrimary announcement checked

New investigations selected. Results are still ahead.

NASA’s latest selection concerns planned lunar instruments. It is not evidence that the investigations have been completed.

  1. A research plan, not a finished result.

    NASA selected three payload suites to study resources, potential shelters and environmental hazards. [1]

  2. A correction belongs in your notes.

    NASA’s 10-02-2026 editor’s note corrects the full names of DISCO and GIMLI. [1]

  3. Keep the strength of the claim visible.

    For your project, cite the announcement as a proposed investigation. Wait for results before claiming a demonstrated finding.

Use the corrected source in your project.

Keep the publication date and correction date with your citation.

Read NASA’s announcement
Last verified 10-05-2026

NASA describes its own program. Independent analysis and published results for these selected investigations are not included.

Evidence & comparisonsSources, claim strength and open questions
Evidence and its limits
Source typeUseful forDoes not establish
NASA announcementWhat the agency selectedCompleted research results
NASA program pageProgram contextIndependent evaluation
Independent researchNot collected in this exampleAgreement or disagreement with future results

Open questions

  • When will these payloads be delivered?
  • Which peer-reviewed papers report their results?
  • Do independent sources support or challenge the eventual findings?
History & correctionsDated evidence stays, even when the briefing changes

  1. Sources checked for this example

    The corrected release and program overview were reviewed. No independent validation is claimed.

  2. Source correction retained

    NASA added an editor’s note correcting two payload names. Use the revised source.

  3. Selection announced

    The selection is the start of this research thread, not a finding from the future instruments.

Sources2 sources · coverage is explicit
  1. Primary announcement · Read 10-05-2026

    NASA · New science investigations

    Published 09-30-2026; corrected 10-02-2026. Describes selected investigations, not completed results.

  2. Program background · Read 10-05-2026

    NASA · Artemis program

    Useful mission context. Future targets are plans, not completed milestones.

Download bibliography (.bib) ↗
See how this watch behavesFirst look, useful change, quiet repeat, failed check

An interactive demonstration. Recorded facts are labeled; hypothetical updates are not new observations. No messages are sent.

First look

The announcement becomes a cited note.

Source chronology: NASA publishes the selection on 09-30-2026. Record the claim at the strength the evidence supports.

Initial briefing

Meaningful update

A source correction changes the record.

Source chronology: the 10-02-2026 correction changes the names used in a citation. Preserve the old note and explain the correction. This example does not claim an email was delivered.

Would qualify for a correction update

Quiet repeat

A new paragraph is not always new evidence.

Hypothetical: navigation, formatting or a rewritten summary changes, but the supported claims do not. Keep the current briefing without an alert.

No notification

Failed check

One source could not be read.

Hypothetical: a source fails. Keep the last cited note with its date and identify the missing check. Do not turn missing evidence into a new conclusion.

Coverage warning on the page