Back to Details

sci-extract

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Sci-Extract — Scientific Extraction

Sci-Extract — 科学文献提取

Professional extraction of core insights and figures from scientific PDF papers.
Note: This skill includes contributions from two authors. See Copyright & License section for details.
从科学PDF论文中专业提取核心见解与图表。
注意：本技能由两位作者共同贡献。详情请查看版权与许可证章节。

Features

功能特性

  • Core Insights: Automatically identify research problem, methodology, key results, innovations, applications, and limitations.
  • Review Literature Extraction: For reviews, surveys, systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and meta-analyses, extract the field scope, taxonomy, evidence base, consensus, disagreements, evidence quality, research gaps, and future directions.
  • Figure Detection: Locate figure captions and crop the corresponding figure regions from PDF pages.
  • Metadata Extraction: Parse title, authors, DOI, journal, and year.
  • 核心见解：自动识别研究问题、研究方法、关键结果、创新点、应用场景及局限性。
  • 综述类文献提取：针对综述、调研、系统综述、元分析、范围综述，提取研究领域范围、分类体系、证据基础、共识观点、分歧点、证据质量、研究空白及未来方向。
  • 图表识别：定位图表标题，并从PDF页面中裁剪对应图表区域。
  • 元数据提取：解析论文标题、作者、DOI、期刊及发表年份。

Steps：

操作步骤：

Step 1: Acquire the paper

步骤1：获取论文

Always read the paper fresh. Never rely on memory of the paper, even if the title looks familiar.
Input typeAction
PDF in 
/mnt/user-data/uploads/
Read it via the appropriate tool (see the 
pdf-reading
skill if available).
arXiv link, arXiv ID, or DOIUse 
web_fetch
on the arXiv abstract page, then on the PDF/HTML version for full text.
Pasted text in the chatUse directly.
Just a title with no linkAsk the user for a link or upload before proceeding. Do not guess the paper.
If the paper is long, first classify the paper type, then prioritize the sections relevant to that type. For original research, prioritize abstract, introduction, method/theory, experiments, conclusion. For review literature, prioritize abstract, introduction, search/selection methods, taxonomy/classification sections, major thematic sections, summary tables, limitations, and future perspectives.
始终重新读取论文内容，切勿依赖对论文的记忆，即使标题看起来熟悉也不例外。
输入类型操作说明
/mnt/user-data/uploads/
目录下的PDF文件		通过合适工具读取（若
pdf-reading
技能可用，请使用该技能）。
arXiv链接、arXiv ID或DOI使用
web_fetch
工具获取arXiv摘要页面，再获取PDF/HTML版本的全文内容。
聊天框中粘贴的文本直接使用该文本。
仅提供标题无链接先向用户索要链接或上传文件，再继续处理。请勿猜测论文内容。
若论文篇幅较长，先对论文类型进行分类，再优先处理与该类型相关的章节。针对原创研究论文，优先处理摘要、引言、方法/理论、实验、结论章节；针对综述类文献，优先处理摘要、引言、搜索/筛选方法、分类/归类章节、主要主题章节、总结表格、局限性及未来展望章节。

Step 2: Classify the paper type

步骤2：分类论文类型

Before choosing the extraction template, classify the paper as one of:
  • Original research article
  • Narrative review / survey
  • Systematic review
  • Meta-analysis
  • Scoping review
  • Perspective / tutorial / methods overview
Use the title, abstract, introduction, and section headings. Signals for review literature include "review", "survey", "systematic review", "meta-analysis", "scoping review", "bibliometric", "taxonomy", "current status", "recent progress", "challenges", "future perspectives", and broad comparison tables.
If the paper is a review, survey, systematic review, meta-analysis, scoping review, perspective, or tutorial overview, do not force it into the original-research Heilmeier template. Use the Review Literature Extraction Mode below. Original research asks "what did this paper do and prove"; review literature asks "how does this paper map the field and judge the evidence".
在选择提取模板前，将论文分类为以下类型之一：
  • 原创研究论文
  • 叙述性综述/调研论文
  • 系统综述
  • 元分析
  • 范围综述
  • 观点性文章/教程/方法综述
可通过标题、摘要、引言及章节标题进行判断。综述类文献的标识词包括"review"、"survey"、"systematic review"、"meta-analysis"、"scoping review"、"bibliometric"、"taxonomy"、"current status"、"recent progress"、"challenges"、"future perspectives"，以及宽泛的对比表格。
若论文为综述、调研、系统综述、元分析、范围综述、观点性文章或教程综述，请勿强行套用原创研究的Heilmeier模板，请使用下方的综述类文献提取模式。原创研究的核心是回答"该论文做了什么、证明了什么"；综述类文献的核心是回答"该论文如何梳理领域现状、评判证据"。

Step 3A: Original Research Mode - Answer the modified Heilmeier questions

步骤3A：原创研究模式 — 回答改良版Heilmeier问题

Answer each of the seven questions below as a labeled subsection, in order. For each question, the rules differ on (a) whether your own evaluation is allowed and (b) whether external citations are allowed. Read the rules carefully before writing each subsection.
按顺序回答以下7个问题，每个问题作为一个带标签的小节。针对每个问题，规则分为(a)是否允许加入个人评价，(b)是否允许引用外部文献。在撰写每个小节前，请仔细阅读规则。

Question 1. What are you trying to do?

问题1. 研究目标是什么？

Open with a one-sentence statement of the paper's contribution written for a smart non-specialist, with absolutely no jargon. Ban acronyms and any technical term a first-year undergrad would not know. If a term of art is unavoidable, define it parenthetically in plain words. Then add one or two sentences expanding the objective in slightly more technical language.
Opinions allowed: no. Stay faithful to the paper. External citations allowed: no.
开篇用一句话向具备一定知识的非专业人士说明论文的贡献，绝对禁止使用行话。避免缩写及任何大一本科生无法理解的技术术语。若必须使用专业术语，需在括号中用通俗易懂的语言定义。随后用1-2句话以稍专业的语言进一步阐述研究目标。
允许个人观点：否。需严格忠实于论文内容。 允许引用外部文献：否。

Question 2. What is the problem, how is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?

问题2. 研究问题是什么？当前解决方案有哪些？现有方法的局限性是什么？

Describe the real-world or scientific problem the paper addresses, then give a brief overview of how the field handles it at the time of the paper, and what the limitations are. This is meant to be a self-contained landscape paragraph, not a literature review. Cover the main competing approaches in plain prose.
Opinions allowed: a small amount, only if it sharpens the framing of the limits. External citations allowed: no. Do not search for or cite outside sources here. Just give an overview from the paper and your general knowledge of the field.
描述论文解决的现实世界或科学问题，简要概述论文发表时领域内的主流解决方案及其局限性。此部分应为独立的领域现状概述段落，而非文献综述。用平实的语言涵盖主要竞争方法。
允许个人观点：少量，仅用于强化对局限性的框架描述。 允许引用外部文献：否。请勿在此处搜索或引用外部来源，仅基于论文内容及你对该领域的通用知识进行概述。

Question 3. What is new in the approach, including core idea, math, and method, and why does the paper claim it will succeed?

问题3. 该方法有哪些创新点？包括核心思路、数学模型及实现方法，论文为何认为该方法会成功？

This is the technical heart of the response and absorbs what would otherwise be a "method" summary. Cover, in this order:
  1. The central technical move that distinguishes the paper from prior work.
  2. The key mathematical objects and formulation. Include the main equation or two, define every symbol you introduce, use display math with 
    \left
    and 
    \right
    for brackets, keep inline math on one line, and prefer standard LaTeX notation.
  3. How the proposed method actually solves the problem mechanically.
  4. The paper's own claim about why the approach will succeed.
Opinions allowed: NO. This subsection is strictly about what the paper says and proposes. Save your evaluation for questions 4, 5, and 6. External citations allowed: no.
此部分是回应的技术核心，相当于"方法"总结的延伸内容。按以下顺序阐述：
  1. 与现有研究相比，该论文的核心技术突破点。
  2. 关键数学对象及公式。需包含1-2个核心方程，定义所有引入的符号，使用
    \left
    和
    \right
    处理显示公式的括号，行内公式保持单行，优先使用标准LaTeX格式。
  3. 该方法如何从机制上解决研究问题。
  4. 论文自身对该方法为何会成功的阐述。
允许个人观点：否。此小节仅阐述论文所述及提出的内容，将个人评价留至问题4、5、6。 允许引用外部文献：否。

Question 4. Who cares? If successful, what difference does it make?

问题4. 谁会关注这项研究？若研究成功，会带来哪些影响？

Discuss the impact: which communities benefit, what becomes possible, and whether this paper has actually shifted the field since publication.
Opinions allowed: yes. This is one of the questions where your judgment matters most. External citations allowed: yes, and encouraged when assessing post-publication impact (adoption by other groups, follow-up papers, deployment). Every external citation must come from a 
web_search
or 
web_fetch
you actually ran in this turn.
讨论研究影响：哪些群体将受益，会实现哪些新可能，以及该论文发表后是否确实推动了领域发展。
允许个人观点：是。此问题中你的判断至关重要。 允许引用外部文献：是，评估论文发表后的影响（如被其他团队采用、后续研究、落地应用）时建议引用。所有外部引用必须来自你当前会话中实际执行的
web_search
或
web_fetch
结果。

Question 5. What are the risks?

问题5. 存在哪些风险？

Cover both the risks the paper itself acknowledges and the ones you see independently. Be concrete: contamination, reward hacking, failure modes, narrow benchmarks, scaling, reproducibility.
Opinions allowed: yes. External citations allowed: yes, when an outside source materially supports a risk claim.
涵盖论文自身承认的风险及你独立发现的风险。需具体明确：污染问题、奖励机制漏洞、失效模式、狭窄基准、可扩展性、可复现性等。
允许个人观点：是。 允许引用外部文献：是，若外部来源能实质性支持风险论断。

Question 6. How much will it cost?

问题6. 成本如何？

Interpret as compute, data, engineering effort, or deployment cost, depending on the paper. State which interpretation you are using. Pull whatever numbers the paper provides (token counts, batch sizes, GPU hours, data volumes) and translate into a rough sense of "what would it take to reproduce this".
Opinions allowed: yes, especially for the "what would it take to reproduce" framing. External citations allowed: yes. Be careful not to conflate this paper's costs with related work by the same authors. If you cite a cost figure, state exactly which paper or model that figure refers to.
根据论文内容，可解读为计算成本、数据成本、工程投入或部署成本，需明确说明你的解读方式。提取论文提供的所有数据（如token数量、批量大小、GPU时长、数据量），并转化为大致的"复现该研究所需的条件"。
允许个人观点：是，尤其是针对"复现所需条件"的框架。 允许引用外部文献：是。注意不要将该论文的成本与同一作者的相关研究混淆。若引用成本数据，需明确说明该数据来自哪篇论文或哪个模型。

Question 7. What are the experiments and results?

问题7. 实验及结果有哪些？

Cover the experimental setup (benchmarks, datasets, baselines, metrics, ablations) and the headline results. This subsection answers "what are the criteria for success and did the paper meet them". Note any conspicuous gap between claims and evidence.
Opinions allowed: small amount, only for noting gaps between claims and evidence. External citations allowed: no.
涵盖实验设置（基准测试、数据集、基线模型、评估指标、消融实验）及核心结果。此小节回答"成功的评判标准是什么？论文是否达到了标准？"。注意记录论文宣称与证据之间的明显差距。
允许个人观点：少量，仅用于指出宣称与证据之间的差距。 允许引用外部文献：否。

Step 3B: Review Literature Extraction Mode

步骤3B：综述类文献提取模式

Use this mode for review papers, survey papers, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, scoping reviews, perspective reviews, and tutorial overviews. Do not ask for a single proposed method, single experiment, or reproduction cost unless the review itself is about benchmarking or a method protocol. The goal is to reconstruct the paper's map of the field and assess how reliable that map is.
Return the following labeled subsections, in order:
本模式适用于综述论文、调研论文、系统综述、元分析、范围综述、观点性综述及教程综述。除非综述本身聚焦于基准测试或方法协议，否则无需询问单一提出方法、单一实验或复现成本。本模式的目标是还原论文对领域的梳理，并评估该梳理的可靠性。
按顺序返回以下带标签的小节：

1. Review scope

1. 综述范围

State what field, problem, population, method family, material class, data type, or application area the paper reviews. Include explicit inclusion and exclusion boundaries when the paper gives them. If the scope is vague, say so.
说明论文综述的领域、问题、研究群体、方法类别、材料类型、数据类型或应用场景。若论文明确给出纳入及排除边界，需一并说明。若范围模糊，需明确指出。

2. Why this review exists now

2. 本综述的研究背景

Explain the motivation: field fragmentation, rapid growth, conflicting evidence, unclear taxonomy, translation gap, reproducibility problem, new technology, or practical need. Keep this faithful to the paper before adding your own judgment.
解释研究动机：领域碎片化、快速发展、证据冲突、分类体系不清晰、转化差距、可复现性问题、新技术出现或实际需求。先忠实于论文内容，再加入个人判断。

3. Taxonomy or organizing framework

3. 分类体系或组织框架

Extract the categories the authors use to organize the field. Preserve the author's hierarchy and terminology. If there are multiple taxonomies, separate them. For each category, give a one-sentence meaning and the main representative approaches, study types, models, materials, datasets, diseases, interventions, or applications.
提取作者用于梳理领域的分类类别。保留作者的层级结构及术语。若存在多个分类体系，需分开阐述。针对每个类别，用一句话说明其含义，并列出主要代表性方法、研究类型、模型、材料、数据集、疾病、干预措施或应用场景。

4. Literature selection and evidence base

4. 文献筛选与证据基础

For systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and meta-analyses, extract databases searched, search period, search terms if available, inclusion criteria, exclusion criteria, screening process, final included study count, and any quality-assessment tool. For narrative reviews and surveys, state whether the search and selection method is unspecified or informal.
针对系统综述、范围综述及元分析，提取检索的数据库、检索时间段（若提供检索词）、纳入标准、排除标准、筛选流程、最终纳入研究数量及所用的质量评估工具。针对叙述性综述及调研论文，说明其检索与筛选方法是否未明确说明或为非正式方法。

5. Field landscape and main themes

5. 领域现状与主要主题

Summarize the major research directions covered by the review. Distinguish mature areas from emerging areas. Mention important datasets, benchmark tasks, experimental platforms, clinical cohorts, model families, materials, or instruments when they are central to the review.
总结综述涵盖的主要研究方向。区分成熟领域与新兴领域。当数据集、基准任务、实验平台、临床队列、模型家族、材料或仪器为综述核心内容时，需提及相关信息。

6. Consensus findings

6. 共识结论

Extract what the reviewed literature broadly agrees on. Separate strong consensus from tentative patterns. If the review does not clearly identify consensus, say so instead of inventing one.
提取综述文献中广泛认可的结论。区分强共识与初步模式。若综述未明确指出共识，需如实说明，切勿自行编造。

7. Disagreements, controversies, and heterogeneity

7. 分歧、争议与异质性

Extract where studies conflict, where mechanisms or interpretations differ, and what explanations the review gives for inconsistent findings. For meta-analyses, include heterogeneity statistics and subgroup/sensitivity findings if reported.
提取研究之间的冲突点、机制或解读的差异，以及综述对不一致结果的解释。针对元分析，若有报告，需纳入异质性统计数据及亚组/敏感性分析结果。

8. Evidence quality and bias

8. 证据质量与偏差

Assess the reliability of the reviewed evidence using what the paper reports: study design, sample size, data quality, benchmark leakage, confounding, publication bias, reproducibility, missing controls, annotation quality, evaluation metrics, or risk-of-bias tools. Mark your own assessment with a first-person phrase such as "My analysis is that," so paper content and your critique remain separate.
利用论文报告的内容评估综述证据的可靠性：研究设计、样本量、数据质量、基准泄露、混杂因素、发表偏差、可复现性、缺失对照组、标注质量、评估指标或偏倚风险工具。用第一人称表述（如"我的分析是"）标记个人评估，以区分论文内容与你的评论。

9. Gaps and future directions

9. 研究空白与未来方向

Extract the open questions, missing datasets, missing experiments, technical barriers, translation barriers, standardization needs, clinical/industrial/policy needs, and concrete future directions identified by the authors. Add your own prioritized gap assessment only with a first-person marker.
提取作者指出的开放问题、缺失数据集、缺失实验、技术壁垒、转化壁垒、标准化需求、临床/工业/政策需求及具体未来方向。仅在加入第一人称标记后，方可添加你自己的优先级空白评估。

10. Important figures and tables

10. 重要图表与表格

Identify taxonomy figures, workflow diagrams, evidence maps, PRISMA flow diagrams, summary tables, comparison tables, benchmark tables, and meta-analysis forest/funnel plots. For each important figure or table, explain what role it plays in understanding the review. If figure extraction is requested, crop or save the relevant figure/table regions when tooling is available.
识别分类图、工作流程图、证据图谱、PRISMA流程图、总结表格、对比表格、基准测试表格及元分析森林图/漏斗图。针对每个重要图表或表格，说明其在理解综述中的作用。若请求提取图表，在工具可用时裁剪或保存相关图表/表格区域。

11. Bottom-line takeaways

11. 核心要点总结

End with three to five concise takeaways. Each takeaway should describe something a researcher can use: a field structure, a reliable conclusion, an unresolved controversy, a weak evidence area, or a concrete research opportunity.
结尾给出3-5条简洁的核心要点。每条要点应描述研究者可利用的内容：领域结构、可靠结论、未解决的争议、证据薄弱领域或具体研究机会。

Attribution rules (apply across all questions)

归因规则（适用于所有问题）

The user must always be able to tell paper content apart from your own analysis. In any subsection where opinions are allowed, prefix every personal judgment with one of: "In my opinion,", "My analysis is that,", "My read is," or an equivalent first-person marker. Never blur the line. In the subsections where opinions are not allowed (questions 1 and 3), do not use these markers at all.
用户必须能够清晰区分论文内容与你的个人分析。在任何允许加入个人观点的小节中，所有个人判断需以以下表述开头："在我看来，"、"我的分析是，"、**"我的理解是，"**或其他等效第一人称表述。切勿模糊两者界限。在不允许加入个人观点的小节（问题1和3）中，请勿使用此类表述。

Citation rules (apply across all questions)

引用规则（适用于所有问题）

Every external citation in your response must come from a 
web_search
or 
web_fetch
you actually ran in this turn. No citations from memory. There is exactly one carve-out: if the paper itself cites a prior work and you are exactly repeating what the paper says about that cited work, you may mention it without a web search. The moment you add anything beyond what the paper literally says, search and cite the search result.
When you do search, cite the source inline so the user can follow up.
你回应中的所有外部引用必须来自当前会话中实际执行的
web_search
或
web_fetch
结果。禁止凭记忆引用。仅存在一个例外情况：若论文本身引用了某项前期研究，且你完全复述论文对该引用研究的描述，则无需进行网络搜索即可提及。一旦你添加了任何超出论文字面内容的信息，必须进行搜索并引用搜索结果。
进行搜索后，需在文中内联引用来源，以便用户跟进查看。

Length and pacing

篇幅与节奏

Keep the response tight. The user has explicitly asked for fast, non-redundant output. Do not repeat the same point under multiple questions. Aim for the shortest response that fully answers all seven questions; if a question genuinely has little to say for a particular paper, keep its subsection to two or three sentences.
保持回应简洁紧凑。用户明确要求快速、无冗余的输出。切勿在多个问题下重复同一观点。目标是用最短的篇幅完整回答所有问题；若某个问题针对特定论文确实无话可说，将该小节控制在2-3句话即可。

Format and formatting compliance

格式规范

Return everything as a single inline markdown response. Use one top-level header naming the paper, then a 
##
header per question. Math compliant with: 
\left
/ 
\right
for display brackets, inline math on one line, every symbol defined, standard LaTeX. Do not use em-dashes or en-dashes anywhere; use commas, semicolons, parentheses, or new sentences instead.
所有内容以单个内联markdown响应返回。使用一个顶级标题命名论文，每个问题对应一个
##
标题。数学公式需符合以下规范：使用
\left
/
\right
处理显示公式的括号，行内公式保持单行，所有符号需定义，使用标准LaTeX格式。请勿使用长破折号或短破折号；请使用逗号、分号、括号或新句子替代。

What not to do

禁止操作

  • Do not produce a separate "Summary" section before the catechism. The catechism is the summary.
  • Do not put personal evaluation in questions 1 or 3.
  • Do not invent numbers, baselines, or experimental results that are not in the paper.
  • Do not insert citations from memory.
  • Do not conflate this paper with related work by the same authors when stating costs or results.
  • Do not analyze a paper you have not actually read this turn.
  • 请勿在问题列表前单独设置"总结"章节。问题列表本身即为总结。
  • 请勿在问题1或3中加入个人评价。
  • 请勿编造论文中不存在的数据、基线模型或实验结果。
  • 请勿凭记忆引用文献。
  • 请勿在说明成本或结果时，将该论文与同一作者的相关研究混淆。
  • 请勿分析当前会话中未实际读取的论文。

Usage

使用方法

This skill has two independent modes:
Mode 1 now starts by classifying the paper type. Original research papers use the modified Heilmeier framework. Review literature uses the Review Literature Extraction Mode, which is designed for review papers, surveys, systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and meta-analyses.
Mode 2 now supports 
--paper-type auto|research|review
. For original research, it extracts research problem, methodology, key results, innovation, application, and limitations. For review literature, it extracts review scope, taxonomy, literature selection method, major themes, consensus findings, controversies, evidence quality, research gaps, future directions, and key tables/figures.
Mode 1 — Heilmeier Analysis (AI-driven, no script needed) Simply share a paper and ask for analysis. The AI follows the 7-question framework above directly. No local script is required.
Mode 2 — Core Insights Extractor (Python CLI) A standalone script that extracts 6 structured fields (research problem, methodology, key results, innovation, application, limitations) with confidence scores. Run from the 
skills/sci-extract/
directory:
bash
undefined
本技能包含两个独立模式：
模式1现在先对论文类型进行分类。原创研究论文使用改良版Heilmeier框架；综述类文献使用综述类文献提取模式，该模式专为综述论文、调研论文、系统综述、范围综述及元分析设计。
模式2现在支持
--paper-type auto|research|review
参数。针对原创研究，提取研究问题、研究方法、关键结果、创新点、应用场景及局限性；针对综述类文献，提取综述范围、分类体系、文献筛选方法、主要主题、共识结论、争议点、证据质量、研究空白、未来方向及关键表格/图表。
模式1 — Heilmeier分析（AI驱动，无需脚本） 只需分享论文并要求分析，AI将直接遵循上述7问题框架处理。无需本地脚本。
模式2 — 核心见解提取器（Python命令行工具） 一个独立脚本，可提取6个结构化字段（研究问题、研究方法、关键结果、创新点、应用场景、局限性）并给出置信度评分。在
skills/sci-extract/
目录下运行：
bash
undefined

Single PDF — outputs JSON by default

单个PDF文件 — 默认输出JSON格式

python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf
python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf

Choose output format

选择输出格式

python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --format markdown python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --format csv
python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --format markdown python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --format csv

Force or auto-detect paper type

强制指定或自动检测论文类型

python extract_core_insights.py review.pdf --paper-type review python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --paper-type auto
python extract_core_insights.py review.pdf --paper-type review python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --paper-type auto

Batch process a folder (4 parallel workers)

批量处理文件夹（4个并行工作进程）

python extract_core_insights.py papers/ --batch
python extract_core_insights.py papers/ --batch

Save to a specific file

保存至指定文件

python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --output results.json

The two modes are independent: Mode 1 produces a narrative Heilmeier analysis; Mode 2 produces structured data fields. Use Mode 2 when you need machine-readable output or batch processing.
python extract_core_insights.py paper.pdf --output results.json

两个模式相互独立：模式1生成叙述性Heilmeier分析报告；模式2生成结构化数据字段。当你需要机器可读输出或批量处理时，请使用模式2。

Configuration

配置要求

Requires 
PyMuPDF
, 
pdfplumber
, and 
numpy
.
需要安装
PyMuPDF
、
pdfplumber
及
numpy
库。

© License & Copyright

© 许可证与版权

Authors & Contributions

作者与贡献

AuthorContributionCopyright
Shuo ZhaoCore extraction engine (features, figure detection, metadata parsing)© 2026 Shuo Zhao
Zhiyao ZhangHeilmeier Analysis module (7-question catechism framework)© 2026 Zhiyao Zhang
作者贡献内容版权所有
Shuo Zhao核心提取引擎（功能特性、图表识别、元数据解析）© 2026 Shuo Zhao
Zhiyao ZhangHeilmeier分析模块（7问题框架）© 2026 Zhiyao Zhang

License

许可证

MIT License — see LICENSE file in the project root.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
MIT License — 详情请查看项目根目录下的LICENSE文件。
特此免费授予任何获得本软件及相关文档文件（"软件"）副本的人，不受限制地处理本软件，包括但不限于使用、复制、修改、合并、发布、分发、再许可和/或销售软件副本的权利，并允许向其提供软件的人做出上述行为，但需符合以下条件：
上述版权声明及本许可声明需包含在软件的所有副本或实质性部分中。
本软件按"原样"提供，无任何明示或暗示的担保，包括但不限于适销性、特定用途适用性及非侵权担保。在任何情况下，作者或版权所有者均不对因软件或软件的使用或其他交易而产生的任何索赔、损害或其他责任承担责任，无论是合同诉讼、侵权诉讼还是其他诉讼。

Copyright Notice

版权声明

Copyright (c) 2026 Shuo Zhao. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 2026 Zhiyao Zhang. All rights reserved.

This work includes contributions from both authors under MIT license.
- Core extraction module: Copyright (c) 2026 Shuo Zhao
- Heilmeier analysis module: Copyright (c) 2026 Zhiyao Zhang
Copyright (c) 2026 Shuo Zhao. All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 2026 Zhiyao Zhang. All rights reserved.

本作品包含两位作者在MIT许可证下的贡献内容。
- 核心提取模块：Copyright (c) 2026 Shuo Zhao
- Heilmeier分析模块：Copyright (c) 2026 Zhiyao Zhang

Original Work Declaration

原创作品声明

This is an original collaborative work created by the authors. No reproduction, redistribution, or commercial use without explicit permission from both authors.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software... (See the LICENSE file in the root directory for the full MIT terms.)

This skill is part of the Aut_Sci_Write suite. For full license terms, see the LICENSE file in the project root.

本作品为作者合作原创。未经两位作者明确许可，不得复制、再分发或商用。
特此免费授予许可，任何获得本软件副本的人...（完整MIT条款请查看根目录下的LICENSE文件。）

本技能是Aut_Sci_Write套件的一部分。完整许可证条款请查看项目根目录下的LICENSE文件。