Lab OS: the work, in one place
A lab runs on decisions and follow-through. Our private status monitor brings projects, people, commitments, and the next useful action into one workspace. Heath sets priorities, reviews the context, and records decisions there.
This is a public guide to the design. The working monitor and its operational records remain private.
One team, four roles
Jack coordinates three specialist roles. They use the same working records, with an owner for each responsibility. Their names identify areas of responsibility within one Lab OS installation.
JackChief of staff · priorities and follow-throughResponsibilities
Coordinates the team, brings work awaiting a decision to Heath, and keeps ownership and next actions explicit. Jack reports to Heath; scientific and personnel decisions remain with the PI.
SamResearch & fundingResponsibilities
Research, literature, scientific quality, and the scientific substance of funding proposals. Prepares material for review and keeps its sources and uncertainties visible.
DanielPeople & teachingResponsibilities
Mentoring, student preparation, meeting context, and teaching support. Helps turn discussions into recorded commitments. Teaching support is currently on demand.
TealcOperations & reliabilityResponsibilities
Email and calendar preparation, administrative and service logistics, and the reliability of background work. Handles funding logistics alongside Sam's scientific work.
One local runtime and private database connect these roles to the same projects and working records.
The PI workflow
- Find what needs attention.
Review an area of work, then open a project or person for context. Research, mentoring, teaching, funding, administration, and service have distinct views.
- Decide and record.
Update the project status, clarify the next action, or record a completion. The latest status becomes part of the project's shared context.
- Return to the same record.
Background preparation and subsequent work use that context. Ownership and completion evidence help distinguish a finished task from a job that simply ran.
FocusDetails when they are usefulExpandable views, adjustable priorities, and personal progress feedback.
The status monitor is the PI's main working interface. Summaries lead to details, and a status can be updated without starting an agent conversation. Chat remains available when a request benefits from discussion.
Priority weights make the allocation of attention explicit, including research, mentoring, teaching, funding, administration, and service. Progress and XP provide personal feedback on recorded completions. They do not measure scientific quality.
ContinuityContext that survives a conversationProject status, next actions, meetings, and evidence stay connected.
Each project's context file begins with its recorded status. Updating that status in the monitor replaces the first status line while preserving the remaining context. Tasks retain an owner and state; completion records preserve the result and its evidence.
Missing or uncertain information should remain visible until the underlying record is updated. An old email, a missing update, or a successful job run alone does not establish that a project has progressed.
ImplementationPrivate records and recoverable changesShared local state, backups, and a separate public website.
The monitor and background jobs share the existing local runtime and private database. The active database and mutable runtime memory stay outside Drive synchronization. Backups and installation checks provide a recovery path for changes.
The monitor and its database are not mirrored here. This public website is for selected, reviewed research material and teaching resources. Published project summaries are separate snapshots; they should not be used as the live operational record.
The earlier Tealc articles document the system's development. Tealc is now the operations role within Lab OS; older repository names and implementation details remain part of that history.
Current limitsUseful follow-through is the testA working organization, with delivery improvements still in progress.
The four-role organization is installed. Reliable delivery of important papers into the PI briefing is still being improved. Teaching support is on demand, without a dedicated teaching schedule. Consolidation of overlapping external schedules is not yet complete.
We are evaluating whether the system reduces repeated context gathering, makes commitments easier to track, and helps the PI notice work awaiting a decision. Drafts and analyses still require scientific review. More jobs or a higher XP total cannot establish that a result is correct.