skills/skills-codex-claude-review/paper-figure/SKILL.md
Generate publication-quality figures and tables from experiment results. Use when user says "画图", "作图", "generate figures", "paper figures", or needs plots for a paper.
npx skillsauth add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep paper-figureInstall 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.
Override for Codex users who want Claude Code, not a second Codex agent, to act as the reviewer. Install this package after
skills/skills-codex/*.This reviewer is a different model family from the Codex executor. Every overlay trace/audit records:
review_independence: cross-family acceptance_status: accepted
Generate all figures and tables for a paper based on: $ARGUMENTS
| Category | Can auto-generate? | Examples | |----------|-------------------|----------| | Data-driven plots | ✅ Yes | Line plots (training curves), bar charts (method comparison), scatter plots, heatmaps, box/violin plots | | Comparison tables | ✅ Yes | LaTeX tables comparing prior bounds, method features, ablation results | | Multi-panel figures | ✅ Yes | Subfigure grids combining multiple plots (e.g., 3×3 dataset × method) | | Architecture/pipeline diagrams | ❌ No — manual | Model architecture, data flow diagrams, system overviews. At best can generate a rough TikZ skeleton, but expect to draw these yourself using tools like draw.io, Figma, or TikZ | | Generated image grids | ❌ No — manual | Grids of generated samples (e.g., GAN/diffusion outputs). These come from running your model, not from this skill | | Photographs / screenshots | ❌ No — manual | Real-world images, UI screenshots, qualitative examples |
In practice: For a typical ML paper, this skill handles ~60% of figures (all data plots + tables). The remaining ~40% (hero figure, architecture diagram, qualitative results) need to be created manually and placed in figures/ before running /paper-write. The skill will detect these as "existing figures" and preserve them.
publication — Visual style preset. Options: publication (default, clean for print), poster (larger fonts), slide (bold colors)pdf — Output format. Options: pdf (vector, best for LaTeX), png (raster fallback)tab10 — Default matplotlib color cycle. Options: tab10, Set2, colorblind (deuteranopia-safe)figures/ — Output directory for generated figuresclaude-review — Claude reviewer invoked through the local claude-review MCP bridge. Set CLAUDE_REVIEW_MODEL if you need a specific Claude model override./paper-plan)figures/ or project rootIf no PAPER_PLAN.md exists, scan for data files and ask the user which figures to generate.
Parse the Figure Plan table from PAPER_PLAN.md:
| ID | Type | Description | Data Source | Priority |
|----|------|-------------|-------------|----------|
| Fig 1 | Architecture | ... | manual | HIGH |
| Fig 2 | Line plot | ... | figures/exp.json | HIGH |
Identify:
Create a shared style configuration script:
# paper_plot_style.py — shared across all figure scripts
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import matplotlib
matplotlib.rcParams.update({
'font.size': FONT_SIZE,
'font.family': 'serif',
'font.serif': ['Times New Roman', 'Times', 'DejaVu Serif'],
'axes.labelsize': FONT_SIZE,
'axes.titlesize': FONT_SIZE + 1,
'xtick.labelsize': FONT_SIZE - 1,
'ytick.labelsize': FONT_SIZE - 1,
'legend.fontsize': FONT_SIZE - 1,
'figure.dpi': DPI,
'savefig.dpi': DPI,
'savefig.bbox': 'tight',
'savefig.pad_inches': 0.05,
'axes.grid': False,
'axes.spines.top': False,
'axes.spines.right': False,
'text.usetex': False, # set True if LaTeX is available
'mathtext.fontset': 'stix',
})
# Color palette
COLORS = plt.cm.tab10.colors # or Set2, or colorblind-safe
def save_fig(fig, name, fmt=FORMAT):
"""Save figure to FIG_DIR with consistent naming."""
fig.savefig(f'{FIG_DIR}/{name}.{fmt}')
print(f'Saved: {FIG_DIR}/{name}.{fmt}')
Use this decision tree for data-driven figures (inspired by Imbad0202/academic-research-skills):
| Data Pattern | Recommended Type | Size | |-------------|-----------------|------| | X=time/steps, Y=metric | Line plot | 0.48\textwidth | | Methods × 1 metric | Bar chart | 0.48\textwidth | | Methods × multiple metrics | Grouped bar / radar | 0.95\textwidth | | Two continuous variables | Scatter plot | 0.48\textwidth | | Matrix / grid values | Heatmap | 0.48\textwidth | | Distribution comparison | Box/violin plot | 0.48\textwidth | | Multi-dataset results | Multi-panel (subfigure) | 0.95\textwidth | | Prior work comparison | LaTeX table | — |
For each figure in the plan, create a standalone Python script:
Line plots (training curves, scaling):
# gen_fig2_training_curves.py
from paper_plot_style import *
import json
with open('figures/exp_results.json') as f:
data = json.load(f)
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize=(5, 3.5))
ax.plot(data['steps'], data['fac_loss'], label='Factorized', color=COLORS[0])
ax.plot(data['steps'], data['crf_loss'], label='CRF-LR', color=COLORS[1])
ax.set_xlabel('Training Steps')
ax.set_ylabel('Cross-Entropy Loss')
ax.legend(frameon=False)
save_fig(fig, 'fig2_training_curves')
Bar charts (comparison, ablation):
fig, ax = plt.subplots(1, 1, figsize=(5, 3))
methods = ['Baseline', 'Method A', 'Method B', 'Ours']
values = [82.3, 85.1, 86.7, 89.2]
bars = ax.bar(methods, values, color=[COLORS[i] for i in range(len(methods))])
ax.set_ylabel('Accuracy (%)')
# Add value labels on bars
for bar, val in zip(bars, values):
ax.text(bar.get_x() + bar.get_width()/2, bar.get_height() + 0.3,
f'{val:.1f}', ha='center', va='bottom', fontsize=FONT_SIZE-1)
save_fig(fig, 'fig3_comparison')
Comparison tables (LaTeX, for theory papers):
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Comparison of estimation error bounds. $n$: sample size, $D$: ambient dim, $d$: latent dim, $K$: subspaces, $n_k$: modes.}
\label{tab:bounds}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Method & Rate & Depends on $D$? & Multi-modal? \\
\midrule
\citet{MinimaxOkoAS23} & $n^{-s'/D}$ & Yes (curse) & No \\
\citet{ScoreMatchingdistributionrecovery} & $n^{-2/d}$ & No & No \\
\textbf{Ours} & $\sqrt{\sum n_k d_k / n}$ & No & Yes \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Architecture/pipeline diagrams (MANUAL — outside this skill's scope):
figures/, preserve it and generate only the LaTeX \includegraphics snippet[MANUAL] in the figure plan and latex_includes.tex# Run all figure generation scripts
for script in gen_fig*.py; do
python "$script"
done
Verify all output files exist and are non-empty. Then render-then-verify: re-open each RENDERED PDF/PNG (not the script) and self-check — no clipped labels, no legend covering data, every number/label readable at final print size. This self-check happens BEFORE the Step 7 review, so the reviewer's budget goes to substance, not to catching clipped axes.
For each figure, output the LaTeX code to include it:
% === Fig 2: Training Curves ===
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figures/fig2_training_curves.pdf}
\caption{Training curves comparing factorized and CRF-LR denoising.}
\label{fig:training_curves}
\end{figure}
Save all snippets to figures/latex_includes.tex for easy copy-paste into the paper.
Send figure descriptions and captions to Claude for review:
mcp__claude-review__review_start:
prompt: |
Review these figure/table plans for a [VENUE] submission.
For each figure:
1. Is the caption informative and self-contained?
2. Does the figure type match the data being shown?
3. Is the comparison fair and clear?
4. Any missing baselines or ablations?
5. Would a different visualization be more effective?
[list all figures with captions and descriptions]
After this start call, immediately save the returned jobId and poll mcp__claude-review__review_status with a bounded waitSeconds until done=true. Treat the completed status payload's response as the reviewer output, and save the completed threadId for any follow-up round.
The checklist is PARTITIONED (pattern from Anthropic's Claude Science
figure-style skill, Apache-2.0): correctness rules always bind — they are
about whether the figure tells the truth, have no aesthetic content, and no
style choice may override them; guidance rules are defaults — they produce
a clean result, but a deliberate, stated alternative may override them.
Correctness — always binds, verify against the DATA before the render:
Guidance — strong defaults (from pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow), a deliberate stated alternative may override — EXCEPT items that Key Rules below make hard (vector-PDF output and no-titles-inside-figures are Key Rules: treat those two as binding, not overridable):
\caption{} (from pedrohcgs)emp_rate)plt.title for publications)figures/
├── paper_plot_style.py # shared style config
├── gen_fig1_architecture.py # per-figure scripts
├── gen_fig2_training_curves.py
├── gen_fig3_comparison.py
├── fig1_architecture.pdf # generated figures
├── fig2_training_curves.pdf
├── fig3_comparison.pdf
├── latex_includes.tex # LaTeX snippets for all figures
└── TABLE_*.tex # standalone table LaTeX files
| Type | When to Use | Typical Size | |------|------------|--------------| | Line plot | Training curves, scaling trends | 0.48\textwidth | | Bar chart | Method comparison, ablation | 0.48\textwidth | | Grouped bar | Multi-metric comparison | 0.95\textwidth | | Scatter plot | Correlation analysis | 0.48\textwidth | | Heatmap | Attention, confusion matrix | 0.48\textwidth | | Box/violin | Distribution comparison | 0.48\textwidth | | Architecture | System overview | 0.95\textwidth | | Multi-panel | Combined results (subfigures) | 0.95\textwidth | | Comparison table | Prior bounds vs. ours (theory) | full width |
Design pattern (type × style matrix) inspired by baoyu-skills. Publication style defaults and figure rules from pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow. Visualization decision tree from Imbad0202/academic-research-skills.
tools
Get a deep critical review of research from Gemini via gemini-review MCP. Use when user says "review my research", "help me review", "get external review", or wants critical feedback on research ideas, papers, or experimental results.
testing
Verify research idea novelty against recent literature. Use when user says "查新", "novelty check", "有没有人做过", "check novelty", or wants to verify a research idea is novel before implementing.
development
Workflow 1: Full idea discovery pipeline. Orchestrates research-lit → idea-creator → novelty-check → research-review to go from a broad research direction to validated, pilot-tested ideas. Use when user says \"找idea全流程\", \"idea discovery pipeline\", \"从零开始找方向\", or wants the complete idea exploration workflow.
data-ai
Generate and rank research ideas given a broad direction. Use when user says "找idea", "brainstorm ideas", "generate research ideas", "what can we work on", or wants to explore a research area for publishable directions.