Home/Science & Research/academic-paper
A

academic-paper

by @imbad0202v
4.3(120)

A 12-agent academic paper writing pipeline covering all disciplines. It handles literature search, outline generation, drafting, citation compliance, formatting, and peer review. Features include style calibration, writing quality checks, and support for multiple paper types, citation formats, and output options (LaTeX/DOCX/PDF).

academic-paperwritingresearchautomationscienceGitHub
Installation
git clone https://github.com/imbad0202/academic-research-skills.git
compare_arrows

Before / After Comparison

1
Before

Manually completing an academic paper, from literature review to drafting, citation, formatting, and multiple revisions, is time-consuming and prone to errors, requiring significant effort.

After

Leveraging an AI agent team automates literature strategy, outline building, draft generation, citation checking, and format output, significantly reducing the writing cycle and improving paper quality and compliance.

SKILL.md

Academic Paper — Academic Paper Writing Agent Team

A general-purpose academic paper writing tool — 12-agent pipeline covering all disciplines, with higher education domain as the default reference.

v2.5 adds two writing quality features:

  • Style Calibration (intake Step 10, optional) — Provide 3+ past papers and the pipeline learns your writing voice (sentence rhythm, vocabulary preferences, citation integration style). Applied as a soft guide during drafting; discipline conventions always take priority. See shared/style_calibration_protocol.md.
  • Writing Quality Check (references/writing_quality_check.md) — A writing quality checklist applied during the draft self-review step. Catches overused AI-typical terms, em dash overuse, throat-clearing openers, uniform paragraph lengths, and monotonous sentence rhythm. These are good writing rules, not detection evasion.

Routing discipline (v3.9.2): see .claude/CLAUDE.md "Routing Discipline (v3.9.2)" + shared/references/intent_clarification_protocol.md for cross-skill routing rules. This skill assumes routing has already settled — ambiguous cross-phase materials should have been clarified upstream.

Quick Start

Minimal command:

Write a paper on the impact of AI on higher education quality assurance
Write a paper on the impact of declining birth rates on private university management strategies

Execution flow:

  1. Configuration interview — paper type, discipline, citation format, output format
  2. Literature search — systematic search strategy, source screening
  3. Architecture design — paper structure, outline, word count allocation
  4. Argumentation construction — claim-evidence chains, logical flow
  5. Full-text drafting — section-by-section draft, register adjustment
  6. Citation compliance + bilingual abstract (parallel)
  7. Peer review — five-dimension scoring, revision suggestions
  8. Output formatting — LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown

Trigger Conditions

Trigger Keywords

English: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, literature review paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, convert format, format paper, conference paper, journal article, thesis chapter, research paper, guide my paper, help me plan my paper, step by step paper, draft manuscript, write methodology, write discussion, parse reviews, revision roadmap, help me with my revision, I got reviewer comments, convert citations

繁體中文: 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 文獻回顧論文, 檢查引用, 轉 LaTeX, 轉換格式, 研討會論文, 期刊文章, 學位論文, 研究論文, 引導我寫論文, 幫我規劃論文, 逐步寫論文, 寫方法論, 寫討論, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖, 幫我修改, 我收到審查意見, 轉換引用格式

Plan Mode Activation

Activate plan mode when the user wants guidance, step-by-step planning, or expresses uncertainty about paper structure. Default rule: when ambiguous between plan and full, prefer plan.

See references/plan_mode_protocol.md for full intent signals and activation rules.

Does NOT Trigger

ScenarioUse Instead
Deep research / fact-checking (not paper writing)deep-research
Reviewing a paper (structured review)academic-paper-reviewer
Full research-to-paper pipelineacademic-pipeline

Distinction from deep-research

Featureacademic-paperdeep-research
Primary outputPublishable paper draftResearch report
StructureJournal-ready (IMRaD, etc.)APA 7.0 report
CitationMulti-format (APA/Chicago/MLA/IEEE/Vancouver)APA 7.0 only
AbstractBilingual (zh-TW + EN)Single language
Peer reviewSimulated 5-dimension reviewEditorial review
Output formatLaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/MarkdownMarkdown only
Revision loopMax 2 rounds with targeted feedbackMax 2 rounds

Agent Team (12 Agents)

#AgentRolePhase
1intake_agentConfiguration interview: paper type, discipline, journal, citation format, output format, language, word count; Handoff detection; Plan mode simplified interviewPhase 0
2literature_strategist_agentSearch strategy design, source screening, annotated bibliography, literature matrixPhase 1
3structure_architect_agentPaper structure selection, detailed outline, word count allocation, evidence mappingPhase 2
4argument_builder_agentArgument construction, claim-evidence chains, logical flow, counter-argument handling; Plan mode argument stress testPhase 3 / Plan Step 3
5draft_writer_agentSection-by-section full draft writing, discipline register adjustment, word count trackingPhase 4
6citation_compliance_agentCitation format verification, reference list completeness, DOI checkingPhase 5a
7abstract_bilingual_agentBilingual abstract (zh-TW + EN), 5-7 keywords eachPhase 5b
8peer_reviewer_agentSimulated double-blind review, five-dimension scoring, revision suggestions (max 2 rounds)Phase 6
9formatter_agentConvert to LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown, journal formatting, cover letter, citation format conversion (APA 7 / Chicago / MLA / IEEE / Vancouver)Phase 7
10socratic_mentor_agentPlan mode Socratic mentor: chapter-by-chapter guidance, convergence criteria (4 signals), question taxonomy (4 types), INSIGHT extractionPlan Step 0-3
11visualization_agentParse paper data and generate publication-quality figure code (Python matplotlib / R ggplot2) with APA 7.0 formatting, colorblind-safe palettes, and LaTeX integrationPhase 4 / Phase 7
12revision_coach_agentParse unstructured reviewer comments into structured Revision Roadmap; classify, map, and prioritize comments; works standalone without prior pipeline executionRevision-Coach mode

Output Formats

Text Formats

LaTeX (.tex + .bib), DOCX (via Pandoc), PDF (via LaTeX or Pandoc), Markdown.

Figures

When the paper contains quantitative results, the visualization_agent can generate publication-ready figures in Python (matplotlib/seaborn) or R (ggplot2) with APA 7.0 formatting and colorblind-safe palettes. Figures are delivered as runnable code + LaTeX \includegraphics integration code. See references/statistical_visualization_standards.md for chart type decision trees and code templates.

Citation Formats

APA 7.0 (default), Chicago (Author-Date or Notes-Bibliography), MLA 9, IEEE, Vancouver. The formatter_agent supports late-stage citation format conversion between any two supported formats via "Convert citations to [format]".


Orchestration Workflow (8 Phases)

Phase 0: CONFIG        -> [intake_agent]              -> Paper Configuration Record
Phase 1: RESEARCH      -> [literature_strategist]      -> Search Strategy + Source Corpus
Phase 2: ARCHITECTURE  -> [structure_architect]        -> Paper Outline + Evidence Map
Phase 3: ARGUMENTATION -> [argument_builder]           -> Argument Blueprint
Phase 4: DRAFTING      -> [draft_writer]               -> Complete Draft
Phase 5a: CITATIONS    -> [citation_compliance] ──┐    -> Citation Audit Report
Phase 5b: ABSTRACT     -> [abstract_bilingual]   ─┘    -> Bilingual Abstract + Keywords  (parallel)
Phase 6: PEER REVIEW   -> [peer_reviewer]              -> Review Report (max 2 revision loops)
Phase 7: FORMAT        -> [formatter]                  -> Final Output Package

See references/workflow_phase_details.md for detailed per-phase agent behavior and output descriptions.

Checkpoint Rules

  1. ⚠️ IRON RULE: User must confirm Paper Configuration Record before proceeding to Phase 1
  2. Phase 2 -> 3: User must approve outline (can request restructuring)
  3. ⚠️ IRON RULE: Max 2 revision loops; unresolved items -> "Acknowledged Limitations"
  4. Peer Review Critical-severity issues block progression to Phase 7
  5. User can skip Phase 1 (literature) if providing own sources

v3.4.0 compliance (applies to full mode): Before finalization, compliance_agent runs RAISE principles-only check (warn-only; primary research is outside PRISMA-trAIce scope). Warnings are listed in the disclosure statement but never block the pipeline. See shared/raise_framework.md §Scope disclaimer.

Phase-by-phase Invocation Contract (v3.9.2)

academic-paper pipeline runs in 8 phases (Phase 0 intake → 7 formatting). Two invocation modes:

Mode A — orchestrator-driven (default): pipeline_orchestrator_agent (in academic-pipeline skill) runs all phases end-to-end with state tracking via Material Passport.

Mode B — phase-by-phase (cross-session resume): User invokes one agent per phase across sessions for long-running projects. Common pattern: write the draft in one session, return next week to citation-check / abstract / peer-review independently.

In Mode B, single-phase agents (Bucket A per docs/design/2026-05-18-ars-v3.9.2-agent-phase-classification.md) stay strictly within their assigned phase for writes. The 7 Bucket A agents in academic-paper are: literature_strategist (P1), structure_architect (P2), draft_writer (P4/P6 per invocation), citation_compliance (P5a), abstract_bilingual (P5b), peer_reviewer (P6), formatter (P7). Reads from upstream phases are allowed.

Multi-phase agents (Bucket B: argument_builder P3+Plan, visualization P4+P7) do exactly the work specified by the caller's invocation for that phase — no extension to other phases in the same call. The v3.6.6 generator-evaluator contract below additionally constrains draft_writer and peer_reviewer sub-phase behavior (Phase 4a/4b, Phase 6a/6b).

Routing into Mode B requires explicit user signal — /ars-<mode> slash command or [direct-mode] prefix. Ambiguous cross-phase input defaults to clarification per .claude/CLAUDE.md Routing Discipline + shared/references/intent_clarification_protocol.md.

Enforcement (v3.9.2): prompt-level via Phase Boundary blocks on Bucket A agents + advisory verifier (scripts/check_pipeline_integrity.py). Deterministic PreToolUse hook + multi-phase envelope deferred to v3.10 active conductor (#134).

v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol

Authoritative orchestration block for the v3.6.6 contract-gated phase splits inside academic-paper full mode. Schema 13.1 since v3.6.6 (shared/sprint_contract.schema.json). Templates: shared/contracts/writer/full.json + shared/contracts/evaluator/full.json. Design spec: docs/design/2026-04-27-ars-v3.6.6-generator-evaluator-contract-design.md §5.

Applies to academic-paper full mode only. Nine non-full modes (plan, outline-only, revision, revision-coach, abstract-only, lit-review, format-convert, citation-check, disclosure) are byte-equivalent across v3.6.5 → v3.6.6 and do not invoke this protocol. Pipeline boundary unchanged: academic-pipeline Stage 2 dispatches academic-paper in plan or full mode (full only invokes this protocol); Stage 3 dispatches the separate academic-paper-reviewer skill (5-panel external editorial review). The in-pair Phase 6 evaluator under this protocol and the Stage 3 reviewer are different review layers — see design doc §5.1 audit conclusion 2.

Overview

v3.6.6 splits Phase 4 (writer drafting) and Phase 6 (in-pair evaluator review) into paper-blind / paper-visible call pairs gated by the writer_full and evaluator_full contracts. The split mirrors academic-paper-reviewer/references/sprint_contract_protocol.md (the v3.6.2 reviewer pattern) but adapts it for single-agent generator modes that have no panel and (for the writer) no scoring_plan.

The load-bearing mechanism is the physical separation of calls: writer Phase 4a never sees the runtime drafting artefacts; evaluator Phase 6a never sees the writer Phase 4b draft. This destroys the "read the paper, then rationalise the standard" drift path on the in-pair self-quality gate.

Four-call structure

For each academic-paper full invocation, Phase 4 + Phase 6 expand from two single calls into four separate model calls. Each call has its own system prompt and user content per the system-vs-user content discipline below.

  1. Phase 4a — writer paper-blind pre-commitment.
    • System prompt: ### Phase 4a — Writer paper-blind pre-commitment sub-section in academic-paper/agents/draft_writer_agent.md § "v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol".
    • User content: writer_full contract JSON + paper metadata only (title, field, word_count).
    • Output: ## Acceptance Criteria Paraphrase section + terminal [PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED] tag.
    • Lint: 3 structural checks (see § "Phase 4a / 6a output lint" below).
  2. Phase 4b — writer paper-visible drafting + self-scoring.
    • System prompt: ### Phase 4b — Writer paper-visible drafting + self-scoring sub-section in the same agent file.
    • User content: writer_full contract JSON (re-injected) + Phase 4a output wrapped in <phase4a_output>...</phase4a_output> data delimiter + upstream drafting artefacts (Paper Configuration Record, Paper Outline, Argument Blueprint, Annotated Bibliography, optional Style Profile, optional Knowledge Isolation Directive).
    • Output: ## Draft Body## Dimension Scores## Failure Condition Checks## Writer Decision.
    • Lint: 4 structural checks (see § "Phase 4b / 6b output lint" below).
  3. Phase 6a — evaluator paper-blind pre-commitment.
    • System prompt: ### Phase 6a — Evaluator paper-blind pre-commitment sub-section in academic-paper/agents/peer_reviewer_agent.md § "v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol".
    • User content: evaluator_full contract JSON + paper metadata + the writer's most recent <phase4a_output> (the writer artefact the evaluator must verify per disagreement_handling.pre_commitment_check_protocol.check_writer_artifact).
    • Output: ## Contract Paraphrase + ## Scoring Plan (per-dimension dimension_id / what_to_look_for / what_triggers_block / what_triggers_warn) + terminal [PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED] tag.
    • Lint: 5 structural checks.
  4. Phase 6b — evaluator paper-visible scoring + decision.
    • System prompt: ### Phase 6b — Evaluator paper-visible scoring + decision sub-section in the same agent file.
    • User content: evaluator_full contract JSON (re-injected) + Phase 6a output wrapped in <phase6a_output>...</phase6a_output> + the writer's <phase4a_output> (unconditional per pre_commitment_check_protocol.check_writer_artifact) + the writer Phase 4b draft (the artefact under review).
    • Output: ## Dimension Scores## Failure Condition Checks## Review Body## Evaluator Decision.
    • Lint: 5 structural checks.

System prompt vs user content discipline

Mirrors sprint_contract_protocol.md §2 reviewer pattern verbatim:

  • System prompt carries invariant policy text only: the phase sub-section instructio

...

User Reviews (0)

Write a Review

Effect
Usability
Docs
Compatibility

No reviews yet

Statistics

Installs1.8K
Rating4.3 / 5.0
Version
Updated2026年5月23日
Comparisons1

User Rating

4.3(120)
5
37%
4
43%
3
13%
2
5%
1
2%

Rate this Skill

0.0

Compatible Platforms

🤖claude-code

Timeline

Created2026年5月19日
Last Updated2026年5月23日