Purpose

Make every visual evidence-bearing. Prefer fewer useful visuals over a decorative inventory.

Inputs

• method card and decision ledger;
• run summaries and final result analysis;
• robustness evidence;
• solution package and frozen numbers in submission mode;
• existing figures/tables.

Figure Types

• Type 1 diagnostic: internal debugging; never in the paper.
• Type 2 comparison: main vs usable baseline or a genuinely tested alternative; optional in paper.
• Type 3 paper: directly supports a main claim; required only when the claim benefits materially from a visual.
• Type 4 appendix: supplementary evidence referenced from the main text.

Workflow

1. List verified claims that need visual or exact tabular support.
2. Reuse an existing artifact when it already communicates the claim.
3. For each proposed visual record:
   • ID and Qx;
   • type;
   • source artifact and frozen claim IDs when applicable;
   • one core claim;
   • chart/table form;
   • target section;
   • status and render needs.
4. Ask the human to confirm judgment-bearing Type 3 claims through one compact choice card when they are not already in the decision ledger.
5. Save methods/Qx/qx_figure_table_plan.md only when durable planning is needed. In lean exploration, a compact in-conversation plan is sufficient.

Planning Heuristics

• Use tables for exact values, parameters, and small comparisons.
• Use plots for trends, distributions, sensitivity, or many-item comparisons.
• Use diagrams for mechanisms, dependencies, and workflows.
• A main-vs-baseline figure needs compatible metrics and the same evaluation setup.
• Do not create a multi-method comparison merely to imply breadth.

Rules