A negative-result archive should keep the attempted hypothesis, exact configuration, run status, raw outputs, failure classification, interpretation, and next condition that could justify another test. It should be searchable without appearing as a current recommended path.
Distinguish a negative result from a broken run
A valid negative result completed under the intended conditions and did not meet the acceptance criterion. A failed run stopped because the environment, dependency, data, service, or procedure broke. An inconclusive run completed but lacked enough evidence to distinguish the hypothesis. These statuses require different next actions, so the ledger should not compress all three into failed.
Preserve the criterion that existed before the run, the configuration, raw output, and failure evidence. If the criterion was invented after seeing the result, record that change. A short interpretation can name why the result matters, but the raw artifact and run conditions remain authoritative. This makes a later revisit possible when workloads, tools, or assumptions change.
Make prior attempts discoverable at the next decision point
Index negative results by component, hypothesis, dataset, error class, and decision, then link them from new experiment proposals. A proposal should show related prior runs before another budget is approved. Similarity search can help find forgotten attempts, but stable tags and identifiers are still needed because semantic matches alone may miss an exact version or operating condition.
A negative record should state what would justify retesting: a dependency changed, a larger dataset arrived, a cost threshold moved, or the previous run was invalidated. This keeps the archive from becoming a graveyard. It also prevents an old result from blocking a materially different experiment merely because the project name looks similar.
Where the service stops
Reality Contact, LLC implements evidence organization and retrieval, but does not certify scientific validity, reproducibility, research integrity, regulatory compliance, safety, authorship, or the correctness of any experimental conclusion. The buyer approves the record schema and storage boundary, verifies scientific interpretations, controls access and retention, and decides which evidence supports the next experiment, publication, or funding choice. This is technical record organization and implementation; it does not replace legal, medical, scientific, safety, compliance, or professional advice. A complete ledger improves traceability but does not certify that a result is valid, reproducible, safe, ethical, or suitable for publication or regulation.
Sources: DVC experiment management documentation; NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy.