Architecture¶
bijux-proteomics-lab architecture is where recommendation intent becomes
workable assay reality. This section should help a reader see how planning,
scheduling, outcomes, and feedback loops operate under lab constraints without
pulling decision policy or shared meaning into the wrong layer.
flowchart LR
intent["recommended assay intent"]
constraints["capacity and dependency constraints"]
planning["planning models"]
schedule["executable schedule"]
outcomes["observed outcomes"]
rerun["rerun and escalation decisions"]
feedback["repository feedback"]
intent --> planning
constraints --> planning
planning --> schedule --> outcomes --> rerun --> feedback
Architectural Promise¶
- the lab package should make operational reality explicit rather than implicit
- schedule decisions should stay traceable back to assay requirements and constraints
- outcome interpretation should feed back into the wider system without stealing program authority
Start With¶
- open Execution Model when the question is how intent becomes schedules and then outcomes
- open Integration Seams when a change risks importing recommendation policy or shared payload meaning into lab logic
- open Module Map when you need the owner for planning, repositories, outcomes, or schema code
Read By Workflow Moment¶
- before execution: Module Map and Execution Model
- during persistence and handoff: State and Persistence and Code Navigation
- when expanding lab behavior: Extensibility Model and Architecture Risks
First Proof Check¶
src/bijux_proteomics_lab/planning.pyandoutcomes.pyfor the lab-facing control flowsrc/bijux_proteomics_lab/schema.pyandserialization.pyfor contract structuresrc/bijux_proteomics_lab/repositories.pyfor durable storage boundaries
Boundary Test¶
If a schedule decision cannot be explained in terms of assay intent, dependencies, and observed outcomes, the architecture is not telling the truth about the package.