📄 Papers — Index & Guide
Overview
All academic papers processed for PUMA. Use Template-Literature-Note-Paper for new entries. Full SLR process: WF-SLR-Pipeline
Sub-folder Organisation
| Folder | Papers |
|---|---|
Triage-Benchmarks/ | Papers on issue classification, bug triage, defect prediction |
Effort-Estimation/ | Papers on story points, software effort, COCOMO derivatives |
LLM-Agents-General/ | General LLM capabilities, agent frameworks, prompt engineering |
PM-AI-Convergence/ | Surveys and overviews of AI in project management |
Reproducibility-SE/ | Papers on reproducibility, open science, experiment design in SE |
Quick Start: Adding a New Paper
1. Find paper via Perplexity / Semantic Scholar / IEEE / ACM
2. Verify in primary source (DOI, arXiv, or publisher)
3. Add to Zotero with tag #puma-pending
4. Use QuickAdd (Alt+L) → select "Literature Note Paper"
5. Fill YAML frontmatter (copy from template)
6. Read + Cornell notes + DRCA
7. Change tag to #puma-include or #puma-exclude
8. Link to relevant MOC: [[80 - MOC/81 Topic-Maps/MOC-Literature-Review]]
Current Papers Index
TABLE authors, year, read_status, prisma_decision, relevance
FROM "20 - Literature/20.1 Papers"
WHERE type = "literature-note" AND subtype = "paper"
SORT year DESC, relevance ASCid: LN-Book-Flyvbjerg2023 title: “How Big Things Get Done — Flyvbjerg & Gardner (2023)” type: literature-note subtype: book tags: [literature, book, project-management, uniqueness-trap, planning-fallacy] authors: [“Flyvbjerg, Bent”, “Gardner, Dan”] year: 2023 publisher: “Crown Publishers” isbn: “978-0593239513” zotero_key: “Flyvbjerg2023” chapters_read: [“Introduction”, “Chapter on Uniqueness Trap”] puma_relevance: “Provides the Uniqueness Trap concept — the third problem dimension justifying PUMA’s historical-pattern learning via few-shot prompting.” read_status: processed created: 2026-03-01
How Big Things Get Done
One-sentence takeaway: Project managers systematically fail to use historical data from similar projects — the Uniqueness Trap — and LLMs with few-shot historical examples are a computational implementation of the prescribed fix (Reference Class Forecasting).
Core Argument
Flyvbjerg & Gardner analyse thousands of large projects and find systematic failure driven by: optimism bias, strategic misrepresentation, and the Uniqueness Trap. The solution is “outside view” forecasting using reference classes of similar past projects.
Key Concepts for PUMA
| Concept | Definition | PUMA Connection |
|---|---|---|
| Uniqueness Trap | Treating every project as sui generis, ignoring base rates | Few-shot prompting provides “base rates” as examples |
| Reference Class Forecasting | Anchor estimates to historical distribution of similar projects | Few-shot k=3/6 implements this computationally |
| Outside view | Using statistical evidence rather than project-specific reasoning alone | PUMA’s H2: few-shot > zero-shot for estimation |
Cornell Notes
| Question | Note |
|---|---|
| What is the core prescriptive recommendation? | Use reference class forecasting before inside-view planning |
| How does PUMA implement this? | Few-shot examples = reference class; zero-shot = inside view |
| Is this empirically validated? | Yes — analysis of thousands of infrastructure projects globally |
Summary: Flyvbjerg demonstrates statistically that managers systematically under-use historical evidence. PUMA’s few-shot prompting strategy is a direct computational implementation of the prescribed solution. This grounds PUMA’s PM relevance in established management science.
đź”— Connections
Permanent note: 30 - Permanent/31 Concepts/PN-Uniqueness-Trap Cited in: PR-PUMA-Ch1-Introduction (context) Supports hypothesis: EX-Hypotheses-H1-H2 (H2 rationale)
id: LN-Book-Allen2001-GTD title: “Getting Things Done — David Allen (2001)” type: literature-note subtype: book tags: [literature, book, gtd, productivity, workflow] authors: [“Allen, David”] year: 2001 publisher: “Viking” isbn: “978-0142000281” zotero_key: “Allen2001” puma_relevance: “GTD framework used for task and project management within this vault.” read_status: processed created: 2026-03-01
Getting Things Done (GTD)
One-sentence takeaway: Capture everything → process ruthlessly → organise by context → review consistently → engage with trusted system.
GTD Principles in This Vault
| Principle | Implementation |
|---|---|
| Capture | 10 - Inbox — everything starts here |
| Clarify | Daily review: what is this? What’s the next action? |
| Organise | TASKS-Active by phase and context |
| Reflect | 95 Reviews — daily + weekly templates |
| Engage | Do the next action, not the project |
đź”— Connections
Implemented in: 90 - GTD (entire folder) · 00 - Home (daily access) Related: 20 - Literature/20.2 Books/LN-Book-Ahrens-Zettelkasten
id: LN-Book-Ahrens-Zettelkasten title: “How to Take Smart Notes — Sönke Ahrens (2022)” type: literature-note subtype: book tags: [literature, book, zettelkasten, note-taking, knowledge-management] authors: [“Ahrens, Sönke”] year: 2022 publisher: “Sönke Ahrens (self)” isbn: “978-3982438801” zotero_key: “Ahrens2022” puma_relevance: “Zettelkasten method implemented in 30 - Permanent folder. Atomic permanent notes + linking = the knowledge architecture of this vault.” read_status: processed created: 2026-03-01
How to Take Smart Notes — Zettelkasten Method
One-sentence takeaway: Writing one permanent, atomic, linked note per idea forces understanding at the moment of capture and builds a network of knowledge that generates insights through unexpected connections.
Zettelkasten Principles in This Vault
| Principle | Implementation |
|---|---|
| Atomic notes | Each PN- note = exactly one idea |
| Own words only | Never copy quotes into permanent notes |
| Links over folders | Connections via wikilinks, not hierarchy |
| Evergreen notes | Notes improve over time with maturity levels |
| Fleeting → Literature → Permanent | Three-stage pipeline in vault structure |
đź”— Connections
Implemented in: 30 - Permanent (entire folder) · Template-Permanent-Note Related: 20 - Literature/20.2 Books/LN-Book-Allen2001-GTD