Jason Academic Writing
by @ithacajason
Complete academic paper writing pipeline with integrity checks and multi-agent review system. Optimized prompts for Methods/Results/Discussion sections. Feat...
clawhub install jason-academic-writingπ About This Skill
name: jason-academic-writing description: "Complete academic paper writing pipeline with integrity checks and multi-agent review system. Optimized prompts for Methods/Results/Discussion sections. Features self-counterargument framework, bias matrix, and overclaim self-audit. Use when writing research papers, need citation verification, anti-hallucination checks, multi-perspective review, or auditable process records." version: 1.0.1 requires: env: - OPENAI_API_KEY - OPENAI_BASE_URL
Academic Writing Pipeline
End-to-end academic paper production with built-in quality gates and multi-agent review.
Pipeline Overview
Research β Write β Integrity Check β Review β Revise β Summary
Each stage has defined inputs/outputs and quality gates. The pipeline is non-linear: stages may loop (Review β Revise β Re-Review) until quality threshold met.
Stage Details
Stage 1: Research
Goal: Gather and organize evidence.
Actions:
1. Literature search via Semantic Scholar API
2. Filter by relevance score β₯ 0.5
3. Grade evidence level (A: meta-analysis, B: RCT, C: observational, D: opinion)
4. Output: research/evidence.json
Script: scripts/research.py
Stage 2: Write
Goal: Generate structured manuscript.
Actions:
1. Build argument chain from evidence
2. Generate sections: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion
3. Track citation markers for each claim
4. Output: draft/manuscript.md
Script: scripts/write.py
Stage 3: Integrity Check (CRITICAL)
Goal: Anti-hallucination verification.
Check types:
Threshold: Must pass 100% of checks to proceed.
Script: scripts/integrity_check.py
APIs used:
https://api.semanticscholar.org)https://api.crossref.org/works/)Stage 4: Review (5-Person Panel)
Agents: | Role | Focus | Score Weight | |------|-------|--------------| | Editor-in-Chief | Contribution, journal fit | 30% | | Methodology | Methods, stats, reproducibility | 25% | | Domain Expert | Related work, theory | 20% | | Devil's Advocate | Strongest counter-arguments | 15% | | Synthesizer | Merge opinions, roadmap | 10% |
Decision mapping:
Script: scripts/review.py
Stage 5: Revise
Goal: Address reviewer feedback.
Actions: 1. Parse Synthesizer roadmap 2. Generate revision plan with priorities 3. Rewrite affected sections 4. Re-run Integrity Check
Script: scripts/revise.py
Stage 6: Process Summary
Goal: Auditable record.
Output: summary.json containing:
Script: scripts/summary.py
Configuration
Edit config.yaml for:
qwen3.5-plus)Usage
# Full pipeline
python scripts/main.py --topic "your research topic"Single stage
python scripts/main.py --stage integrity-check --input draft/manuscript.mdWith custom config
python scripts/main.py --config custom_config.yaml
Quality Gates
| Gate | Requirement | Action on Fail | |------|-------------|----------------| | Evidence | β₯5 Grade A/B sources | Return to Research | | Integrity | 100% verification | Return to Write | | Review | β₯65 score | Loop Revise | | Final Integrity | 100% verification | Block submission |
Key Principles
1. Integrity First: Citation verification is non-negotiable 2. Quantified Review: Scores enable objective decisions 3. Loopable Pipeline: Revision cycles until threshold met 4. Auditable Output: Process Summary for journal submission
Reference Files
references/review_rubric.md - Detailed scoring criteriareferences/evidence_levels.md - Evidence grading standardsreferences/citation_styles.md - Journal formatting guidesπ‘ Examples
# Full pipeline
python scripts/main.py --topic "your research topic"Single stage
python scripts/main.py --stage integrity-check --input draft/manuscript.mdWith custom config
python scripts/main.py --config custom_config.yaml
βοΈ Configuration
Edit config.yaml for:
qwen3.5-plus)