--- name: "paper-write" description: "Draft LaTeX paper section by section from an outline. Use when user says \"写论文\", \"write paper\", \"draft LaTeX\", \"开始写\", or wants to generate LaTeX content from a paper plan." --- > Override for Codex users who want **Gemini**, not a second Codex agent, to act as the reviewer. Install this package **after** `skills/skills-codex/*`. # Paper Write: Section-by-Section LaTeX Generation Draft a LaTeX paper based on: **$ARGUMENTS** ## Constants - **REVIEWER_MODEL = `gemini-review`** — Gemini reviewer invoked through the local `gemini-review` MCP bridge. Set `GEMINI_REVIEW_MODEL` if you need a specific Gemini model override. - **TARGET_VENUE = `ICLR`** — Default venue. Supported: `ICLR`, `NeurIPS`, `ICML`. Determines style file and formatting. - **ANONYMOUS = true** — If true, use anonymous author block. Set `false` for camera-ready. - **MAX_PAGES = 9** — Main body page limit. Counts from first page to end of Conclusion section. References and appendix are NOT counted. - **DBLP_BIBTEX = true** — Fetch real BibTeX from DBLP/CrossRef instead of LLM-generated entries. Eliminates hallucinated citations. Zero install required. Set `false` to use legacy behavior (LLM search + `[VERIFY]` markers). ## Inputs 1. **PAPER_PLAN.md** — outline with claims-evidence matrix, section plan, figure plan (from `/paper-plan`) 2. **NARRATIVE_REPORT.md** — the research narrative (primary source of content) 3. **Generated figures** — PDF/PNG files in `figures/` (from `/paper-figure`) 4. **LaTeX includes** — `figures/latex_includes.tex` (from `/paper-figure`) 5. **Bibliography** — existing `.bib` file, or will create one If no PAPER_PLAN.md exists, ask the user to run `/paper-plan` first or provide a brief outline. ## Templates ### Venue-Specific Setup The skill includes conference templates in `templates/`. Select based on TARGET_VENUE: **ICLR:** ```latex \documentclass{article} \usepackage{iclr2026_conference,times} % \iclrfinalcopy % Uncomment for camera-ready ``` **NeurIPS:** ```latex \documentclass{article} \usepackage[preprint]{neurips_2025} % \usepackage[final]{neurips_2025} % Camera-ready ``` **ICML:** ```latex \documentclass[accepted]{icml2025} % Use [accepted] for camera-ready ``` ### Project Structure Generate this file structure: ``` paper/ ├── main.tex # master file (includes sections) ├── iclr2026_conference.sty # or neurips_2025.sty / icml2025.sty ├── math_commands.tex # shared math macros ├── references.bib # bibliography (filtered — only cited entries) ├── sections/ │ ├── 0_abstract.tex │ ├── 1_introduction.tex │ ├── 2_related_work.tex │ ├── 3_method.tex # or preliminaries, setup, etc. │ ├── 4_experiments.tex │ ├── 5_conclusion.tex │ └── A_appendix.tex # proof details, extra experiments └── figures/ # symlink or copy from project figures/ ``` **Section files are FLEXIBLE**: If the paper plan has 6-8 sections, create corresponding files (e.g., `4_theory.tex`, `5_experiments.tex`, `6_analysis.tex`, `7_conclusion.tex`). ## Workflow ### Step 0: Backup and Clean If `paper/` already exists, back up to `paper-backup-{timestamp}/` before overwriting. Never silently destroy existing work. **CRITICAL: Clean stale files.** When changing section structure (e.g., 5 sections → 7 sections), delete section files that are no longer referenced by `main.tex`. Stale files (e.g., old `5_conclusion.tex` left behind when conclusion moved to `7_conclusion.tex`) cause confusion and waste space. ### Step 1: Initialize Project 1. Create `paper/` directory 2. Copy venue template from `templates/` — the template already includes: - All standard packages (amsmath, hyperref, cleveref, booktabs, etc.) - Theorem environments with `\crefname{assumption}` fix - Anonymous author block 3. Generate `math_commands.tex` with paper-specific notation 4. Create section files matching PAPER_PLAN structure **Author block (anonymous mode):** ```latex \author{Anonymous Authors} ``` ### Step 2: Generate math_commands.tex Create shared math macros based on the paper's notation: ```latex % math_commands.tex — shared notation \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb{R}} \newcommand{\E}{\mathbb{E}} \DeclareMathOperator*{\argmin}{arg\,min} \DeclareMathOperator*{\argmax}{arg\,max} % Add paper-specific notation here ``` ### Step 3: Write Each Section Process sections in order. For each section: 1. **Read the plan** — what claims, evidence, citations belong here 2. **Read NARRATIVE_REPORT.md** — extract relevant content, findings, and quantitative results 3. **Draft content** — write complete LaTeX (not placeholders) 4. **Insert figures/tables** — use snippets from `figures/latex_includes.tex` 5. **Add citations** — use `\citep{}` / `\citet{}` (all three venues use `natbib`) #### Section-Specific Guidelines **§0 Abstract:** - Must be self-contained (understandable without reading the paper) - Structure: problem → approach → key result → implication - Include one concrete quantitative result - 150-250 words (check venue limit) - No citations, no undefined acronyms - No `\begin{abstract}` — that's in main.tex **§1 Introduction:** - Open with a compelling hook (1-2 sentences, problem motivation) - State the gap clearly ("However, ...") - List contributions as a numbered or bulleted list - End with a brief roadmap ("The rest of this paper is organized as...") - Include the main result figure if space allows - Target: 1.5 pages **§2 Related Work:** - **MINIMUM 1 full page** (3-4 substantive paragraphs). Short related work sections are a common reviewer complaint. - Organize by category using `\paragraph{Category Name.}` - Each category: 1 paragraph summarizing the line of work + 1-2 sentences positioning this paper - Do NOT just list papers — synthesize and compare - End each paragraph with how this paper relates/differs **§3 Method / Preliminaries / Setup:** - Define notation early (reference math_commands.tex) - Use `\begin{definition}`, `\begin{theorem}` environments for formal statements - For theory papers: include proof sketches of key results in main body, full proofs in appendix - For theory papers: include a **comparison table** of prior bounds vs. this paper - Include algorithm pseudocode if applicable (`algorithm2e` or `algorithmic`) - Target: 1.5-2 pages **§4 Experiments:** - Start with experimental setup (datasets, baselines, metrics, implementation details) - Main results table/figure first - Then ablations and analysis - Every claim from the introduction must have supporting evidence here - Target: 2.5-3 pages **§5 Conclusion:** - Summarize contributions (NOT copy-paste from intro — rephrase) - Limitations (be honest — reviewers appreciate this) - Future work (1-2 concrete directions) - Ethics statement and reproducibility statement (if venue requires) - Target: 0.5 pages **Appendix:** - Proof details (full proofs of main-body theorems) - Additional experiments, ablations - Implementation details, hyperparameter tables - Additional visualizations ### Step 4: Build Bibliography **CRITICAL: Only include entries that are actually cited in the paper.** 1. Scan all `\citep{}` and `\citet{}` references in the drafted sections 2. Build a citation key list 3. For each citation key: - Check existing `.bib` files in the project/narrative docs - If not found and **DBLP_BIBTEX = true**, use the verified fetch chain below - If not found and **DBLP_BIBTEX = false**, search arXiv/Scholar for correct BibTeX - **NEVER fabricate BibTeX entries** — mark unknown ones with `[VERIFY]` comment 4. Write `references.bib` containing ONLY cited entries (no bloat) #### Verified BibTeX Fetch (when DBLP_BIBTEX = true) Three-step fallback chain — zero install, zero auth, all real BibTeX: **Step A: DBLP (best quality — full venue, pages, editors)** ```bash # 1. Search by title + first author curl -s "https://dblp.org/search/publ/api?q=TITLE+AUTHOR&format=json&h=3" # 2. Extract DBLP key from result (e.g., conf/nips/VaswaniSPUJGKP17) # 3. Fetch real BibTeX curl -s "https://dblp.org/rec/{key}.bib" ``` **Step B: CrossRef DOI (fallback — works for arXiv preprints)** ```bash # If paper has a DOI or arXiv ID (arXiv DOI = 10.48550/arXiv.{id}) curl -sLH "Accept: application/x-bibtex" "https://doi.org/{doi}" ``` **Step C: Mark `[VERIFY]` (last resort)** If both DBLP and CrossRef return nothing, mark the entry with `% [VERIFY]` comment. Do NOT fabricate. **Why this matters:** LLM-generated BibTeX frequently hallucinates venue names, page numbers, or even co-authors. DBLP and CrossRef return publisher-verified metadata. Upstream skills (`/research-lit`, `/novelty-check`) may mention papers from LLM memory — this fetch chain is the gate that prevents hallucinated citations from entering the final `.bib`. **Automated bib cleaning** — use this Python pattern to extract only cited entries: ```python import re # 1. Grep all \citep{...} and \citet{...} from all .tex files # 2. Extract unique keys (handle multi-cite like \citep{a,b,c}) # 3. Parse the full .bib file, keep only entries whose key is in the cited set # 4. Write the filtered bib ``` This prevents bib bloat (e.g., 948 lines → 215 lines in testing). **Citation verification rules (from claude-scholar + Imbad0202):** 1. Every BibTeX entry must have: author, title, year, venue/journal 2. Prefer published venue versions over arXiv preprints (if published) 3. Use consistent key format: `{firstauthor}{year}{keyword}` (e.g., `ho2020denoising`) 4. Double-check year and venue for every entry 5. Remove duplicate entries (same paper with different keys) ### Step 5: De-AI Polish (from kgraph57/paper-writer-skill) After drafting all sections, scan for common AI writing patterns and fix them: **Content patterns to fix:** - Significance inflation ("groundbreaking", "revolutionary" → use measured language) - Formulaic transitions ("In this section, we..." → remove or vary) - Generic conclusions ("This work opens exciting new avenues" → be specific) **Language patterns to fix (watch words):** - Replace: delve, pivotal, landscape, tapestry, underscore, noteworthy, intriguingly - Remove filler: "It is worth noting that", "Importantly,", "Notably," - Avoid rule-of-three lists ("X, Y, and Z" appearing repeatedly) - Don't start consecutive sentences with "This" or "We" ### Step 6: Cross-Review with REVIEWER_MODEL Send the complete draft to Gemini review: ``` mcp__gemini-review__review_start: prompt: | Review this [VENUE] paper draft (main body, excluding appendix). Focus on: 1. Does each claim from the intro have supporting evidence? 2. Is the writing clear, concise, and free of AI-isms? 3. Any logical gaps or unclear explanations? 4. Does it fit within [MAX_PAGES] pages (to end of Conclusion)? 5. Is related work sufficiently comprehensive (≥1 page)? 6. For theory papers: are proof sketches adequate? 7. Are figures/tables clearly described and properly referenced? For each issue, specify: severity (CRITICAL/MAJOR/MINOR), location, and fix. [paste full draft text] ``` After this start call, immediately save the returned `jobId` and poll `mcp__gemini-review__review_status` with a bounded `waitSeconds` until `done=true`. Treat the completed status payload's `response` as the reviewer output, and save the completed `threadId` for any follow-up round. Apply CRITICAL and MAJOR fixes. Document MINOR issues for the user. ### Step 7: Reverse Outline Test (from Research-Paper-Writing-Skills) After drafting all sections: 1. **Extract topic sentences** — pull the first sentence of every paragraph 2. **Read them in sequence** — they should form a coherent narrative on their own 3. **Check claim coverage** — every claim from the Claims-Evidence Matrix must appear 4. **Check evidence mapping** — every experiment/figure must support a stated claim 5. **Fix gaps** — if a topic sentence doesn't advance the story, rewrite the paragraph ### Step 8: Final Checks Before declaring done: - [ ] All `\ref{}` and `\label{}` match (no undefined references) - [ ] All `\citep{}` / `\citet{}` have corresponding BibTeX entries - [ ] No author information in anonymous mode - [ ] Figure/table numbering is correct - [ ] Page count within MAX_PAGES (main body to Conclusion end) - [ ] No TODO/FIXME/XXX markers left in the text - [ ] No `[VERIFY]` markers left unchecked - [ ] Abstract is self-contained (understandable without reading the paper) - [ ] Title is specific and informative (not generic) - [ ] Related work is ≥1 full page - [ ] references.bib contains ONLY cited entries (no bloat) - [ ] **No stale section files** — every .tex in `sections/` is `\input`ed by `main.tex` - [ ] **Section files match main.tex** — file numbering and `\input` paths are consistent ## Output Protocols > Follow these shared protocols for all output files: > - **[Output Versioning Protocol](../../shared-references/output-versioning.md)** — write timestamped file first, then copy to fixed name > - **[Output Manifest Protocol](../../shared-references/output-manifest.md)** — log every output to MANIFEST.md > - **[Output Language Protocol](../../shared-references/output-language.md)** — respect the project's language setting ## Key Rules - **Large file handling**: If the Write tool fails due to file size, immediately retry using Bash (`cat << 'EOF' > file`) to write in chunks. Do NOT ask the user for permission — just do it silently. - **Do NOT generate author names, emails, or affiliations** — use anonymous block or placeholder - **Write complete sections, not outlines** — the output should be compilable LaTeX - **One file per section** — modular structure for easy editing - **Every claim must cite evidence** — cross-reference the Claims-Evidence Matrix - **Compile-ready** — the output should compile with `latexmk` without errors (modulo missing figures) - **No over-claiming** — use hedging language ("suggests", "indicates") for weak evidence - **Venue style matters** — all three venues (ICLR/NeurIPS/ICML) use `natbib` (`\citep`/`\citet`) - **Page limit = main body to Conclusion** — references and appendix do NOT count - **Clean bib** — references.bib must only contain entries that are actually `\cite`d - **Section count is flexible** — match PAPER_PLAN structure, don't force into 5 sections - **Backup before overwrite** — never destroy existing `paper/` directory without backing up ## Writing Quality Reference Principles from [Research-Paper-Writing-Skills](https://github.com/Master-cai/Research-Paper-Writing-Skills): 1. **One message per paragraph** — each paragraph makes exactly one point 2. **Topic sentence first** — the first sentence states the paragraph's message 3. **Explicit transitions** — connect paragraphs with logical connectors 4. **Reverse outline test** — extract topic sentences; they should form a coherent narrative De-AI patterns from [kgraph57/paper-writer-skill](https://github.com/kgraph57/paper-writer-skill): 5. **No AI watch words** — delve, pivotal, landscape, tapestry, underscore 6. **No significance inflation** — groundbreaking, revolutionary, paradigm shift 7. **No formulaic structures** — vary sentence openings and transitions ## Acknowledgements Writing methodology adapted from [Research-Paper-Writing-Skills](https://github.com/Master-cai/Research-Paper-Writing-Skills) (CCF award-winning methodology). Citation verification from [claude-scholar](https://github.com/Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar) and [Imbad0202/academic-research-skills](https://github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills). De-AI polish from [kgraph57/paper-writer-skill](https://github.com/kgraph57/paper-writer-skill). Backup mechanism from [baoyu-skills](https://github.com/jimliu/baoyu-skills).