academic-paper
这个技能提供一个12智能体组成的学术论文写作流水线,涵盖从文献调研、大纲构建、草稿撰写到引用检查、格式转换和同行评审的全流程。支持多种论文类型、引用格式和输出方式,并具备写作风格校准和质量检查功能,显著提升学术论文撰写效率和质量。
git clone https://github.com/imbad0202/academic-research-skills.gitBefore / After 效果对比
1 组独立完成一篇学术论文,从文献调研到初稿、引用、格式调整和多轮修改,耗时漫长且易出错,需要投入大量时间和精力。
借助AI智能体团队,自动化文献策略、大纲构建、草稿生成、引用检查和格式输出,大幅缩短撰写周期并提升论文质量和合规性。
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.mdfor 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:
- Configuration interview — paper type, discipline, citation format, output format
- Literature search — systematic search strategy, source screening
- Architecture design — paper structure, outline, word count allocation
- Argumentation construction — claim-evidence chains, logical flow
- Full-text drafting — section-by-section draft, register adjustment
- Citation compliance + bilingual abstract (parallel)
- Peer review — five-dimension scoring, revision suggestions
- 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.mdfor full intent signals and activation rules.
Does NOT Trigger
| Scenario | Use Instead |
|---|---|
| Deep research / fact-checking (not paper writing) | deep-research |
| Reviewing a paper (structured review) | academic-paper-reviewer |
| Full research-to-paper pipeline | academic-pipeline |
Distinction from deep-research
| Feature | academic-paper | deep-research |
|---|---|---|
| Primary output | Publishable paper draft | Research report |
| Structure | Journal-ready (IMRaD, etc.) | APA 7.0 report |
| Citation | Multi-format (APA/Chicago/MLA/IEEE/Vancouver) | APA 7.0 only |
| Abstract | Bilingual (zh-TW + EN) | Single language |
| Peer review | Simulated 5-dimension review | Editorial review |
| Output format | LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown | Markdown only |
| Revision loop | Max 2 rounds with targeted feedback | Max 2 rounds |
Agent Team (12 Agents)
| # | Agent | Role | Phase |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | intake_agent | Configuration interview: paper type, discipline, journal, citation format, output format, language, word count; Handoff detection; Plan mode simplified interview | Phase 0 |
| 2 | literature_strategist_agent | Search strategy design, source screening, annotated bibliography, literature matrix | Phase 1 |
| 3 | structure_architect_agent | Paper structure selection, detailed outline, word count allocation, evidence mapping | Phase 2 |
| 4 | argument_builder_agent | Argument construction, claim-evidence chains, logical flow, counter-argument handling; Plan mode argument stress test | Phase 3 / Plan Step 3 |
| 5 | draft_writer_agent | Section-by-section full draft writing, discipline register adjustment, word count tracking | Phase 4 |
| 6 | citation_compliance_agent | Citation format verification, reference list completeness, DOI checking | Phase 5a |
| 7 | abstract_bilingual_agent | Bilingual abstract (zh-TW + EN), 5-7 keywords each | Phase 5b |
| 8 | peer_reviewer_agent | Simulated double-blind review, five-dimension scoring, revision suggestions (max 2 rounds) | Phase 6 |
| 9 | formatter_agent | Convert to LaTeX/DOCX (via Pandoc)/PDF/Markdown, journal formatting, cover letter, citation format conversion (APA 7 / Chicago / MLA / IEEE / Vancouver) | Phase 7 |
| 10 | socratic_mentor_agent | Plan mode Socratic mentor: chapter-by-chapter guidance, convergence criteria (4 signals), question taxonomy (4 types), INSIGHT extraction | Plan Step 0-3 |
| 11 | visualization_agent | Parse paper data and generate publication-quality figure code (Python matplotlib / R ggplot2) with APA 7.0 formatting, colorblind-safe palettes, and LaTeX integration | Phase 4 / Phase 7 |
| 12 | revision_coach_agent | Parse unstructured reviewer comments into structured Revision Roadmap; classify, map, and prioritize comments; works standalone without prior pipeline execution | Revision-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.mdfor detailed per-phase agent behavior and output descriptions.
Checkpoint Rules
- ⚠️ IRON RULE: User must confirm Paper Configuration Record before proceeding to Phase 1
- Phase 2 -> 3: User must approve outline (can request restructuring)
- ⚠️ IRON RULE: Max 2 revision loops; unresolved items -> "Acknowledged Limitations"
- Peer Review Critical-severity issues block progression to Phase 7
- User can skip Phase 1 (literature) if providing own sources
v3.4.0 compliance (applies to
fullmode): Before finalization,compliance_agentruns 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. Seeshared/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 fullmode. 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 fullmode 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-pipelineStage 2 dispatchesacademic-paperin plan or full mode (full only invokes this protocol); Stage 3 dispatches the separateacademic-paper-reviewerskill (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.
- Phase 4a — writer paper-blind pre-commitment.
- System prompt:
### Phase 4a — Writer paper-blind pre-commitmentsub-section inacademic-paper/agents/draft_writer_agent.md§ "v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol". - User content:
writer_fullcontract JSON + paper metadata only (title,field,word_count). - Output:
## Acceptance Criteria Paraphrasesection + terminal[PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED]tag. - Lint: 3 structural checks (see § "Phase 4a / 6a output lint" below).
- System prompt:
- Phase 4b — writer paper-visible drafting + self-scoring.
- System prompt:
### Phase 4b — Writer paper-visible drafting + self-scoringsub-section in the same agent file. - User content:
writer_fullcontract 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).
- System prompt:
- Phase 6a — evaluator paper-blind pre-commitment.
- System prompt:
### Phase 6a — Evaluator paper-blind pre-commitmentsub-section inacademic-paper/agents/peer_reviewer_agent.md§ "v3.6.6 Generator-Evaluator Contract Protocol". - User content:
evaluator_fullcontract JSON + paper metadata + the writer's most recent<phase4a_output>(the writer artefact the evaluator must verify perdisagreement_handling.pre_commitment_check_protocol.check_writer_artifact). - Output:
## Contract Paraphrase+## Scoring Plan(per-dimensiondimension_id/what_to_look_for/what_triggers_block/what_triggers_warn) + terminal[PRE-COMMITMENT-ACKNOWLEDGED]tag. - Lint: 5 structural checks.
- System prompt:
- Phase 6b — evaluator paper-visible scoring + decision.
- System prompt:
### Phase 6b — Evaluator paper-visible scoring + decisionsub-section in the same agent file. - User content:
evaluator_fullcontract JSON (re-injected) + Phase 6a output wrapped in<phase6a_output>...</phase6a_output>+ the writer's<phase4a_output>(unconditional perpre_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:
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
...
用户评价 (0)
发表评价
暂无评价
统计数据
用户评分
为此 Skill 评分