17 skills found
Write CCF rebuttals, author responses, revision ledgers, response letters, and conservative resubmission plans. Use for 审稿意见回复, rebuttal, revision ledger, and 重投迁移. Ground promises in feasible changes and actual evidence. Ordinary manuscript writing has a separate owner.
Assess research ideas for value, novelty, insight, and mechanism. Use for 思路审核, 靠谱吗, 值得做吗, 创新够不够, idea review, scoring, and ranking; no numeric-score request is needed. Default to concept-only review without experiment assessment, including ideas extracted from manuscripts. Developing an idea belongs to ccf-idea-optimizer; evaluating manuscript evidence or writing belongs to ccf-paper-reviewer.
Review manuscript claims, evidence, and writing without rewriting. Use for 文章审核, 审稿, 稿件有什么硬伤, 结论站得住吗, 投稿成熟度, writing review, and version comparison. Return a structured scientific or writing review; scores need not be explicitly requested. Concept-only judgment belongs to ccf-idea-reviewer even with a full PDF; requested prose edits belong to ccf-paper-writer.
Improve academic paper writing quality for ML/CV/NLP-style papers with clear section structure, paragraph flow, and reviewer-facing presentation. Use when drafting or revising Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, Method, Experiments, or Conclusion; polishing figures/tables; checking claim-support alignment; or performing self-review before submission.
Write point-by-point rebuttals to reviewer comments. Extract concerns from reviews, generate evidence-based responses, and format as a structured rebuttal document. Use after receiving peer review feedback.
ARS-Codex research, academic writing, manuscript review, and experiment planning. Use for deep research, literature or systematic reviews, meta-analysis, research questions, paper drafts, revisions, revision roadmaps, abstracts, citations, integrity checks, peer review, and research-to-paper workflows. Korean: 논문 심사, 논문 수정, 초록 작성, 체계적 문헌고찰, 연구부터 논문까지. Español: revisión de literatura, revisar artículo, enmendar mi artículo, escribir resumen, investigación a artículo. Also use for ARS aliases: /ar
Provide qualitative-first, evidence-traceable developmental review of scholarly works and audit low-stakes research-assessment rubrics with optional local quality controls. Never use for ranking people or consequential decisions.
Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments. Use for authorized review of scientific manuscripts, protocols, preprints, or research proposals; reporting-guideline selection; claim–evidence checks; methods, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, figure/table, and citation critique; or revision-response planning.
Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-review.
Revise papers based on reviewer feedback. Map reviewer concerns to specific sections, apply targeted edits, run additional experiments if needed, and verify improvements. Use after receiving peer review with revision requests.
Audit, revise, or draft manuscript statistical reporting for Nature / high-impact journal submissions. Use when the user asks to check statistical analysis sections, p values, confidence intervals, sample size, biological versus technical replicates, randomization, blinding, multiple-comparison correction, model assumptions, figure legends, Results statistics wording, reviewer comments about statistics, or Chinese academic drafts needing publication-ready Statistical analysis text. Also trigger
Structured scholarly-work evaluation for papers, proposals, literature reviews, methods sections, evidence quality, citation support, and research-writing feedback.
