Find the perfect capability for your agent.
Get a deep critical review of research from GPT via Codex 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.
Search published venue papers (IEEE, ACM, Springer, etc.) via Semantic Scholar API. Complements /aris-arxiv (preprints) with citation counts, venue metadata, and TLDR. Use when user says "search semantic scholar", "find IEEE papers", "find journal papers", "venue papers", "citation search", or wants published literature beyond arXiv preprints.
Comprehensive research assistant that synthesizes information from multiple sources with citations. Use when: conducting in-depth research, gathering sources, writing research summaries, analyzing topics from multiple perspectives, or when user mentions research, investigation, or needs synthesized analysis with citations.
Remove signs of AI-generated writing from text. Use when editing or reviewing text to make it sound more natural and human-written. Based on Wikipedia's comprehensive "Signs of AI writing" guide. Detects and fixes patterns including: inflated symbolism, promotional language, superficial -ing analyses, vague attributions, em dash overuse, rule of three, AI vocabulary words, negative parallelisms, and excessive conjunctive phrases.
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.
Creates formal academic research papers following IEEE/ACM formatting standards with proper structure, citations, and scholarly writing style. Use when the user asks to write a research paper, academic paper, or conference paper on any topic.
Drafting and refining academic rebuttals for top-tier AI/CS conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, CVPR, ECCV, AAAI, ARR, KDD, UAI, AISTATS, TMLR, etc.). Use this skill whenever the user needs to respond to reviewer comments, write a rebuttal, handle reviewer feedback, clarify technical misunderstandings, present additional experimental results, or deal with borderline accept/reject decisions. Also trigger when the user mentions keywords like "rebuttal", "reviewer", "review response", "author response", "camera-ready", "rebut", "AC", "area chair", "meta-review", or discusses conference review scores. Trigger for Chinese-language requests too, e.g. "写rebuttal", "回复审稿人", "审稿意见", "rebuttal怎么写", "reviewer说我的baseline不够".
This skill provides reference guidance for citation verification in academic writing. Use when the user asks about "citation verification best practices", "how to verify references", "preventing fake citations", or needs guidance on citation accuracy. This skill supports ml-paper-writing by providing detailed verification principles and common error patterns.
Write publication-ready ML/AI papers for NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, ACL, AAAI, COLM. Use when drafting papers from research repos, structuring arguments, verifying citations, or preparing camera-ready submissions. Includes LaTeX templates, reviewer guidelines, and citation verification workflows.
Deep analysis of a single paper — generate structured notes with figures, evaluation, and knowledge graph updates
Search existing paper notes by title, author, keyword, or research domain
Daily paper recommendation workflow — search arXiv and Semantic Scholar, score and recommend papers
This skill should be used when the user asks to "run initial analysis", "analyze single-cell data", "QC my data", "run bioinformatics pipeline", "generate analysis report", "explore my dataset", "do exploratory data analysis", "initial data analysis", or needs to perform quality control, dimensionality reduction, clustering, or marker analysis on single-cell biology data (CyTOF, scRNA-seq, flow cytometry, proteomics).
Use when experiments complete to judge what claims the results support, what they don't, and what evidence is still missing. Codex MCP evaluates results against intended claims and routes to next action (pivot, supplement, or confirm). Use after experiments finish — before writing the paper or running ablations.
Monitor running experiments, check progress, collect results. Use when user says "check results", "is it done", "monitor", or wants experiment output.
Analyze ML experiment results, compute statistics, generate comparison tables and insights. Use when user says "analyze results", "compare", or needs to interpret experimental data.
Full DeepScientist research pipeline: scout → baseline → idea → experiment → analysis → optimize → write → review → finalize. End-to-end autonomous research lifecycle.
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews via Codex MCP, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
Workflow 1.5: Bridge between idea discovery and auto review. Reads EXPERIMENT_PLAN.md, implements experiment code, deploys to GPU, collects initial results. Use when user says "实现实验", "implement experiments", "bridge", "从计划到跑实验", "deploy the plan", or has an experiment plan ready to execute.
