What this is

An attempt to think more clearly about inverse problems in materials and optics by documenting my reasoning publicly.

I’m 22, finishing my undergraduate degree, and trying to figure out how to avoid overclaiming when models fit data well but mechanisms remain ambiguous.

This site is my working framework—not finished, not polished, probably naive in places I haven’t realized yet.

Why it’s public

Making this public forces discipline. It’s harder to drift toward overclaiming when past analyses are visible and falsifiable.

The intended audience is:

  1. Future me (to maintain standards when publication pressure hits)
  2. Future collaborators (to understand how I think about uncertainty)
  3. Anyone else working on similar problems who finds the framework useful

What to expect

This will change. I’m defending my thesis in May 2026 and starting graduate study shortly after. As I encounter systems this framework doesn’t handle, I’ll revise it.

It’s incomplete. The Reading Ledger has 11 methods but I’ve only deeply used 5–6. The Notes section is sparse. The structure is ahead of the content because I’m building it as I go.

It might be wrong. I’m documenting my current understanding, not universal truths. If you spot errors or inconsistencies, let me know.

Maintenance commitment

I review this site when new projects change previous constraint analyses, when I discover I was wrong about something, or when I learn new method failure modes.

If it stops being updated, either the reasoning fully internalized (success), or I abandoned it under career pressure (failure).

Last major review

January 2026 (initial build)

Contact

Errors, inconsistencies, questions:
anuraag.sharma22 [at] student.xjtlu.edu.cn

If you’re a PI or hiring manager I contacted: This site reflects my actual thinking process, not a curated portfolio. If it looks too cautious or too ambitious, that’s real—not positioning.