skills/43-wentorai-research-plugins/skills/research/paper-review/scientify-write-review-paper/SKILL.md
Write literature reviews and survey papers from collected papers
npx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research scientify-write-review-paperInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Don't ask permission. Just do it.
Guide for writing a structured literature review or survey paper from papers you've already collected. This skill helps with reading strategy, note organization, and academic writing.
Workspace: See ../_shared/workspace-spec.md for directory structure. Outputs go to $WORKSPACE/review/.
Before starting, ensure you have:
$WORKSPACE/papers//literature-survey in $WORKSPACE/survey/clusters.jsonCheck active project:
cat ~/.openclaw/workspace/projects/.active 2>/dev/null
ls $WORKSPACE/papers/
Based on clusters from survey, prioritize reading:
| Priority | Criteria | Reading Depth | |----------|----------|---------------| | P1 (Must-read) | High citation, foundational, directly relevant | Full read | | P2 (Important) | Key methodology, major experimental results | Abstract + methods + experiments | | P3 (Reference) | Supporting material, tangentially related | Abstract only |
Create $WORKSPACE/review/reading_plan.md:
# Reading Plan
## P1 - Must-read (Full read)
- [ ] [paper_id]: [title] - [reason]
- [ ] ...
## P2 - Important (Selective read)
- [ ] ...
## P3 - Reference (Skim)
- [ ] ...
For each paper, create $WORKSPACE/review/notes/{paper_id}.md using template in references/note-template.md.
Create $WORKSPACE/review/comparison.md:
# Method Comparison
| Paper | Year | Category | Key Innovation | Dataset | Metric | Result |
|-------|------|----------|----------------|---------|--------|--------|
| [A] | 2023 | Data-driven | ... | ... | RMSE | 0.05 |
| [B] | 2022 | Hybrid | ... | ... | RMSE | 0.08 |
Create $WORKSPACE/review/timeline.md:
# Research Timeline
## 2018-2019: Early Exploration
- [Paper A]: First proposal of method X
- [Paper B]: Introduction of technique Y
## 2020-2021: Method Maturation
- [Paper C]: Proposed SOTA method
- ...
## 2022-2023: New Trends
- [Paper D]: Began addressing problem Z
- ...
## Key Milestones
1. [Year]: [Event/Paper] - [Significance]
Create $WORKSPACE/review/taxonomy.md:
# Taxonomy of Approaches
## Dimension 1: Method Type
- Data-driven
- Statistical (e.g., GPR, SVM)
- Deep Learning
- CNN-based
- RNN/LSTM-based
- Transformer-based
- Hybrid
- Model-based
- Electrochemical
- Equivalent Circuit
## Dimension 2: Data Source
- Laboratory Data
- Real-world Driving Data
- Synthetic Data
## Dimension 3: Prediction Horizon
- Short-term (< 100 cycles)
- Medium-term (100-500 cycles)
- Long-term (> 500 cycles)
Create $WORKSPACE/review/draft.md using template in references/survey-template.md.
Key sections: Abstract -> Introduction -> Background -> Taxonomy -> Comparison -> Datasets -> Future Directions -> Conclusion
For a thesis chapter:
# Chapter 2: Literature Review
## 2.1 Introduction
## 2.2 [Topic Area 1]
## 2.3 [Topic Area 2]
## 2.4 Summary and Research Gaps
| Section | Citation Density | |---------|------------------| | Abstract | 0 citations | | Introduction | 10-20 citations | | Background | 5-10 citations | | Main Survey | 50-100+ citations | | Conclusion | 2-5 citations |
Introducing similar work:
Introducing contrasting work:
Summarizing:
$WORKSPACE/review/
├── reading_plan.md # Reading plan
├── notes/ # Reading notes
│ ├── {paper_id}.md
│ └── ...
├── comparison.md # Comparison table
├── timeline.md # Timeline analysis
├── taxonomy.md # Taxonomy
├── draft.md # Review draft
└── bibliography.bib # References
development
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
development
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
testing
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
data-ai
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.