--- name: validate-bib description: Validate bibliography entries against citations in all lecture files. Structural checks (missing/unused entries, malformed fields) by default; `--semantic` adds citation-drift detection, DOI verification, and style-consistency checks. argument-hint: "[--semantic] [--skip-doi] [--cite-claim]" allowed-tools: ["Read", "Grep", "Glob", "Write", "Bash", "WebFetch"] --- # Validate Bibliography Cross-reference citations in lecture files against bibliography entries. Two modes: - **Default (structural):** missing entries, unused entries, malformed fields, typo candidates. - **`--semantic`:** adds citation-drift detection (duplicate entries for the same paper), DOI verification via crossref, and citation-style consistency within each file. Report saved to `quality_reports/bib_audit_[structural|semantic].md`. ## Mode 1: Structural (default) ### Steps 1. **Read the bibliography file** and extract all citation keys. 2. **Scan lecture files for citation keys:** - `.tex`: `\cite{`, `\citet{`, `\citep{`, `\citeauthor{`, `\citeyear{`, `\textcite{`, `\parencite{` - `.qmd` / `.md`: `@key`, `[@key]`, `[@key1; @key2]` - Extract all unique citation keys used. 3. **Cross-reference:** - **Missing entries (CRITICAL):** cited in lectures, absent from `.bib`. - **Unused entries (informational):** in `.bib` but never cited. - **Typo candidates:** keys within edit-distance 2 of a `.bib` key (e.g., `Smith2020` vs `Smth2020`). 4. **Check entry quality:** - Required fields present (author, title, year, journal/booktitle). - Author field properly formatted. - Year in 1900–current. - No malformed characters / encoding issues. - `doi` field normalized (no leading `https://doi.org/`). 5. **Write report** to `quality_reports/bib_audit_structural.md`. ### Files scanned ``` Slides/*.tex Quarto/*.qmd guide/*.qmd master_supporting_docs/**/*.tex ``` ### Bibliography location `Bibliography_base.bib` at repo root by default; override via CLAUDE.md. ## Mode 2: Semantic (`--semantic`) Everything in Mode 1, plus: ### 2a. Citation drift detection Multiple `.bib` entries describing the same paper under different keys. Symptoms: - `Smith2020` + `Smith2020a` with identical DOI or title. - `CallawaySantAnna2021` + `CS2021` both pointing to the same paper. - Collaborator-merged `.bib` files. **Detection heuristics (any → FLAG):** | Check | Signal | |---|---| | Same DOI across keys | Hard-duplicate (CRITICAL) | | Same title (case-insensitive, punct-stripped) | Likely duplicate (CRITICAL) | | Same author+year+journal | Probable duplicate (MEDIUM) | | Title Jaccard > 0.85 on tokens ≥ 4 chars | Soft-duplicate (LOW) | For each flagged pair: list both keys, where each is cited, and recommend a canonical key (prefer most-cited, then alphabetically first). ### 2b. DOI verification (optional; network) For each entry with a `doi`, fetch `https://api.crossref.org/works/{doi}` and compare: - First-author last name - Year - Title (Jaccard > 0.7 on normalized tokens) - Container-title / journal (exact or abbreviation) **Severity:** - Author or title mismatch → CRITICAL (wrong paper) - Year mismatch → MEDIUM (preprint vs published, or typo) - Journal mismatch → LOW (legitimate preprint variants) **Rate limit:** cap 50 lookups per run, 0.5s delay between calls. Cache in `quality_reports/.doi_cache.json`. **Opt-out:** `--skip-doi` for offline or no-WebFetch environments. ### 2c. Style consistency within each file For each file, count citation commands (`\citet` vs `\citep` vs `\cite`; `@key` vs `[@key]`). FLAG files with mixed styles without an obvious pattern (e.g., 20× `\citep` and 3× `\cite` in the same deck). Low-severity. ### 2d. Cite-claim sanity (flag-only) Gated behind `--cite-claim`. For the top-10 most-cited works per file, WebFetch the crossref abstract and surface it beside the in-text context. **No auto-judgment** — humans decide if the claim matches. > **This is existence/structure, not appropriateness.** Deciding whether the cited paper *actually says* what the in-text claim attributes to it is [`/verify-claims`](../verify-claims/SKILL.md)'s job — it reads the source and grounds a supports / partial / contradicts verdict in quotes + pages (with the EXPLAINED escape for a defensible named alternative). `--cite-claim` only surfaces the abstract; for the verdict, run `/verify-claims`. ### Report structure (`quality_reports/bib_audit_semantic.md`) ```markdown # Bibliography Semantic Audit **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD **Bibliography:** Bibliography_base.bib (N entries) **Files scanned:** [list] ## Summary | Check | Critical | Medium | Low | |---|---|---|---| | Structural | | | | | Citation drift | | | | | DOI verification | | | | | Style consistency | 0 | 0 | | ## Critical Issues ### Duplicate entries | Keys | Signal | Citations | Recommended canonical | |---|---|---|---| ### DOI mismatches | Key | Field | .bib value | crossref value | |---|---|---|---| ## Medium / Low issues … ## Next steps 1. Resolve duplicates — pick canonical key, update citations, remove orphans. 2. Fix DOI mismatches — verify paper in crossref or strip the wrong DOI. 3. Review style-consistency notes. ``` ## Exit behavior - **Structural:** exit 0; report enumerates issues. - **Semantic:** exit 0 if only LOW findings; exit 1 on any CRITICAL. Usable as a pre-submission gate. ## Cross-references - `.claude/skills/review-paper/SKILL.md` — pair for full pre-submission. - `.claude/skills/audit-reproducibility/SKILL.md` — numeric-claims counterpart. - `.claude/skills/verify-claims/SKILL.md` — citation **appropriateness** counterpart (does the cited paper support the claim?). This skill checks that a citation *exists and is well-formed*; `/verify-claims` checks that it *holds*. ## What this skill does NOT do - Judge whether a citation is used in the right *context* — whether the cited paper actually *says* what the claim attributes to it. That is `/verify-claims`'s job (see 2d); this skill stays existence-and-structure only. - Auto-fix your `.bib` file — all edits are recommendations. - Check non-DOI identifiers (ISBN, arXiv, SSRN) — roadmap.