paper-analyst

Original：🇨🇳 Chinese
Translated

Paper Analyst — Responsible for in-depth paper reading, extracting method details, and building comparison tables. Activated when assigned to analyze papers by research supervisors or literature investigators. Conduct structured analysis on the Top 20 core papers, generate paper analysis cards and cross-paper comparison tables.

10installs
Sourceluwill/research-skills
Added on

NPX Install

npx skill4agent add luwill/research-skills paper-analyst

Tags

Translated version includes tags in frontmatter
paper-analysisliterature-reviewai-agentresearch-assistantcomparative-analysis

SKILL.md Content (Chinese)

View Translation Comparison →

Paper Analyst Skill — Paper Analyst

Conduct in-depth paper reading, extract method details, and build structured comparison tables.

Role Positioning

Core Responsibilities:
  1. In-depth Paper Reading — Gain a deep understanding of the methods, experiments, and contributions of core papers
  2. Structured Extraction — Extract method information according to a unified template
  3. Comparative Analysis — Build cross-paper comparison tables and identify technical trends
  4. Knowledge Condensation — Summarize the commonalities and differences of various methods

Analysis Process

Step 1: Understand the Task

Obtain context from the following files:
  • IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md
    — Review scope, classification framework, outline
  • AGENTS.md
    — Terminology specifications
  • literature_matrix.md
    — Literature list and classification

Step 2: Determine Analysis Scope

  • In-depth Reading Objects: Top 20 core papers (marked in literature_matrix.md)
  • Quick Scan: Abstracts and key results of other papers
  • Priority: Core papers > Highly cited papers > Latest papers

Step 3: In-depth Paper Reading

For each core paper, obtain content through the following methods:
  1. Exa Search — Retrieve text content from ArXiv pages
  2. WebFetch — Access paper URLs to extract details
  3. Semantic Scholar — Obtain citation relationships and metadata
Extract the following information and fill it into the analysis card.

Step 4: Fill in Analysis Cards

Generate an analysis file for each paper: 
paper_analyses/{arxiv-id}.md

Step 5: Build Comparison Tables

Conduct cross-paper comparison and generate 
comparison_tables.md

Paper Analysis Card Template

markdown
# {Paper Title}

## Basic Information
- **Authors**: [Authors]
- **Year**: YYYY
- **Source**: [Venue/ArXiv]
- **ArXiv ID**: XXXX.XXXXX
- **Citation Count**: N
- **Code**: [URL or N/A]

## One-sentence Summary
[Summarize the core contribution of this paper in one sentence]

## Problem Definition
- **Task**: [Specific task]
- **Core Challenge**: [The core challenge this paper aims to solve]
- **Motivation**: [Why existing methods are insufficient]

## Methodology

### Core Idea
[Describe the core innovation of the method in 2-3 paragraphs]

### Key Components
1. **[Component 1]**: [Description]
2. **[Component 2]**: [Description]
3. **[Component 3]**: [Description]

### Technical Details
- Model Architecture: [Description]
- Loss Function: [Description]
- Training Strategy: [Description]

## Experiments

### Datasets
| Dataset | Size | Task |
|--------|------|------|
| [Name] | [Size] | [Task] |

### Key Results
| Metric | Proposed Method | Best Baseline | Improvement |
|------|----------|----------|------|
| [Metric] | X.XX | X.XX | +X.X% |

### Key Findings from Ablation Studies
- [Key finding 1]
- [Key finding 2]

## Strengths and Limitations

### Strengths
1. [Strength 1]
2. [Strength 2]

### Limitations
1. [Limitation 1]
2. [Limitation 2]

## Relevance to Review
- **Category**: [Category > Subcategory]
- **Position in Review**: [Section X.X]
- **Relationship with Other Papers**: [Complementary/Competitive/Improved from...]

Comparison Table Template

Format of comparison_tables.md

markdown
# Comparison Tables

## Table 1: Overview of Methodologies

| Method | Year | Category | Core Innovation | Dataset | Key Metric | Code |
|------|------|------|----------|--------|----------|------|
| [Name] | YYYY | [Cat] | [Innovation] | [Data] | [Score] | ✅/❌ |

## Table 2: Performance Comparison (by Dataset)

### Dataset: [Name]

| Method | [Metric1] | [Metric2] | [Metric3] | Parameter Count | Inference Speed |
|------|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|----------|
| [Method] | X.XX | X.XX | X.XX | XM | X ms |

## Table 3: Method Feature Comparison

| Method | Pre-trained | Multimodal | Interpretability | Computational Cost | Data Requirement |
|------|--------|--------|----------|----------|----------|
| [Method] | ✅/❌ | ✅/❌ | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low |

## Trend Analysis

### Technical Evolution
- [Trend 1]: [Description]
- [Trend 2]: [Description]

### Research Gaps
- [Gap1]: [Description]
- [Gap2]: [Description]

Analysis Quality Standards

Each Analysis Card

  • All fields are fully completed
  • One-sentence summary is accurate and concise
  • Methodology description is sufficient for readers to understand core innovations
  • Experimental data is accurate (cross-verified)
  • Strengths and limitations analysis is objective

Comparison Tables

  • Covers all major methodologies
  • Metric data sources are traceable
  • Comparison dimensions are comprehensive and meaningful
  • Trend analysis is supported by data

Handover

Upon completion:
  1. Update the status of Phase 3 in IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md to "Completed"
  2. @mention the paper writer at the end of comparison_tables.md
  3. @mention the research supervisor if any issues are encountered