Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review…
Orchestrator for the full academic research pipeline: research -> write -> integrity check -> review -> revise -> re-review -> re-revise -> final integrity check -> finalize. Coordinates deep-research, academic-paper, and academic-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory, coverage-bounded…
Transparent, itemized impressions of AI-generated WRITING STYLE — the repo's ONLY non-integrity track. Two passes: a deterministic defensive-hedge density screen (tools/checkaistyle.py, AIS-DEFENSIVE-HEDGE) plus a fresh cross-model GROSS-cases-only semantic pass over the 13 AIS- style tells (broken narrative arc, LLM…
MEMO-ONLY prior-work overlap advisory: surfaces the two ADVISORY taxonomy signals neither a tool nor a model can decide from the paper alone — ADV-TRIVIAL-COMBINATION (standard A+B+C / 缝合 stapling) and ADV-DUPLICATE-PUBLICATION (repackaged / duplicate submission). The executor RETRIEVES candidate prior work (DBLP…
End-to-end substantive-integrity forensic sweep of a research paper (especially autoresearch / AI-Scientist-style output). Orchestrates the whole pipeline: ingest (arxiv-id | pdf | dir → working dir + pdftotext for L0) → /evidence-ledger (artifact manifest + observability level L0/L1/L2 + span-anchored claims.json) →…
Generates rigorous devil's advocate critiques from methodological, theoretical, and practical perspectives. Use when the user asks to challenge their own work, find weaknesses, stress-test assumptions, anticipate reviewer objections, or argue against their research claims. Run BEFORE writing a draft for stronger…
Writes a complete IMRaD-structured academic paper draft (Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, References) from the user's notes, documents, and wiki content. Use when the user asks to write a paper, create a manuscript, generate a draft, or produce academic writing. Do NOT…
Generates complete, runnable visualization code for research figures. Produces matplotlib/seaborn Python scripts for quantitative data and Mermaid diagrams for conceptual relationships, workflows, and taxonomies. Use when the user asks for charts, graphs, visualizations, figures, or diagrams. Produces code only — does…
PaperSprint is a Scrum-inspired academic paper agent workflow for conference or journal drafts. Use when Codex needs to clarify paper direction, estimate likely sprint count, set sprint goals and focus areas, assess venue fit, organize reviewer or editor lenses, convert critique into a prioritized revision backlog…
Open ScholarPeer Literature Review & Expansion Agent — performs External Context retrieval via the dynamic-web search strategy. Activate this persona when the user invokes /2-osp-literature. Runs three distinct rounds (sub-domain anchor, method anchor, temporal expansion) to construct the live reference frame Cdynamic.
Open ScholarPeer Query Agent — formulates probing questions targeting specific weaknesses of the paper. Activate this persona when the user invokes /5-osp-qa. Runs in the main thread; delegates each question to the Answer Generator Agent (subagent) on tools that support it, or self-reflects with strict turn markers on…
Open ScholarPeer Reviewer Agent — synthesizes the structured summary, domain narrative, missing baselines, and verified Q&A pairs into a single consolidated review formatted to the venue's guidelines. Activate this persona when the user invokes /6-osp-review. Decoupled from investigation: this agent does no new…
CRUCIBLE: a Claude-only adversarial expert workshop that stress-tests a scientific paper and then, opt-in, rebuilds it. ACT I (TRIBUNAL): from the paper PDF (plus a few public cited works it fetches), a topic-adapted fleet of expert referee subagents (every contested claim argued from at least two COMPETING…
Simulate a multi-reviewer academic paper review process and produce actionable revision plans. Use this skill whenever the user wants feedback on an academic paper, research manuscript, conference submission, or draft — especially for venues like NeurIPS, ACL, ICML, EMNLP, ICLR, AAAI, or any CS conference/journal.…
Improve academic writing using a comprehensive guide of writing principles. Use this skill when the user asks to improve, rewrite, polish, or check their writing — at any granularity (sentence, paragraph, section, or full paper). Trigger on phrases like "improve my writing", "rewrite this section", "apply writing…
Scenario playbook for answering a SPECIFIC reviewer concern in an NLP/ML/AI rebuttal — 28 concern types (novelty, simple combination, unclear motivation, weak baselines, marginal gains, missing ablations, no significance, data leakage, no human eval, reproducibility, and more), each with a bad-answer anti-pattern and…
Write conference/journal author-response rebuttals that clarify and convince, following Parikh–Batra–Lee's "How we write rebuttals" method (two-audience mindset, itemize→brain-dump→draft→revise, 18 tactics, the neutral-third-party test). Use when responding to peer reviews, writing an author response / rebuttal /…
A structured process for getting several role-specific reviewers to examine a paper, business plan, presentation, code, or other submission before it is sent out.
Unified author-response skill for all peer-review rebuttal formats: CV one-page PDF (CVPR/ICCV/ECCV), OpenReview threaded discussion (NeurIPS/ICLR/ACM MM), per-review character limits (ICML/KDD), Nature/journal point-by-point revision letters, and ARR/TMLR rolling revision. Routes by venue artifact family after shared…