mirror of
https://github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills.git
synced 2026-09-14 13:51:17 +08:00
Edward Cheng-I Wu
8fa3d651ad
Promotes the [Unreleased] block to v3.21.2 (2026-09-06) and aligns every version-bearing surface, following the v3.21.1 release-prep file set: CHANGELOG heading (empty [Unreleased] anchor kept), plugin/marketplace manifests, CITATION.cff, POSITIONING.md, MODE_REGISTRY.md, .claude/CLAUDE.md (table row, Key Additions, Version Info), academic-pipeline/SKILL.md plus its content-lock hash, docs/ARCHITECTURE.md current markers, the five README badges/headings/entries, and the spec-consistency lint pins with their fixtures. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011sWwwG3oCbtL4cGhRsr5US Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
5.2 KiB
5.2 KiB
Mode Registry
Single source of truth for all modes across the ARS suite. 27 modes across 4 skills.
When adding or modifying modes, update this file first — SKILL.md files and CLAUDE.md should reference this registry.
Last updated: v3.21.2 (2026-09-06)
deep-research (8 modes)
| Mode | Spectrum | Output | Oversight | Triggers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
full |
Balanced | APA 7.0 report, 3,000-8,000 words | High | "research [topic]", "deep research", "academic analysis" |
quick |
Fidelity | Research brief, 500-1,500 words | Medium | "quick brief", "30 minute summary", "quick research" |
review |
Balanced | Reviewer report on provided text | High | "review this paper", "evaluate this paper", "assess this source" |
lit-review |
Fidelity | Annotated bibliography + synthesis | Medium | "literature review", "annotated bibliography" |
three-way-scan |
Fidelity | WHY/HOW/WHAT paper shortlist + cross-paper synthesis | Low | "WHY HOW WHAT papers", "3W literature scan", "compare these papers" |
fact-check |
Fidelity | Claim-by-claim verification report | Medium | "verify claims", "fact-check", "evidence verification" |
socratic |
Originality | Research Plan Summary + INSIGHT collection | Very High | "guide my research", "help me think through", "I'm not sure what to research" |
systematic-review |
Fidelity | PRISMA 2020 report, 5,000-15,000 words | Medium | "systematic review", "meta-analysis", "PRISMA" |
academic-paper (11 modes)
| Mode | Spectrum | Output | Oversight | Triggers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
full |
Balanced | Complete paper draft (IMRaD or domain-appropriate) | High | "write a paper", "academic paper", "research paper" |
plan |
Originality | Chapter Plan + INSIGHT collection (Socratic) | Very High | "guide my paper", "help me plan", "step by step paper" |
outline-only |
Balanced | Detailed outline + evidence map | High | "paper outline", "just need an outline" |
revision |
Fidelity | Revised draft + point-by-point R&R responses | High | "revise paper", "incorporate reviewer feedback" |
revision-coach |
Balanced | Reviewer path: Revision Roadmap + Response Letter Skeleton. Explicit real-committee variant: source-accounted concern tracker + placeholder response skeleton | Medium | "parse reviews", "I got reviewer comments", "track these committee comments" |
abstract-only |
Fidelity | Bilingual abstract (zh-TW + EN) + keywords | Medium | "write abstract" |
lit-review |
Fidelity | Annotated bibliography in paper format | Medium | "literature review paper", "write a lit review" |
format-convert |
Fidelity | Formatted document (LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF/MD) | Low | "convert to LaTeX", "convert citations to [format]" |
citation-check |
Fidelity | Citation error report | Low | "check citations", "verify references" |
disclosure |
Fidelity | Default venue path: applicability/status bundle; policy-anchor path: anchor-specific render | Low | "AI disclosure for [venue]", "generate AI usage statement" |
rebuttal-audit |
Fidelity | Advisory QA of an existing rebuttal draft (per-comment coverage + gaps + risk flags); no generation; no Schema 11 emission | Low | "audit my response", "check my rebuttal", "did I miss any reviewer comment" |
academic-paper-reviewer (6 modes)
| Mode | Spectrum | Output | Oversight | Triggers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
full |
Balanced | 5 review reports + Editorial Decision + Revision Roadmap | High | "review paper", "peer review", "manuscript review" |
re-review |
Fidelity | Revision verification checklist + residual issues | Medium | "check revisions", "verification review" |
quick |
Fidelity | Journal-Fit Reviewer quick assessment + key issues list | Low | "quick review", "quick look" |
methodology-focus |
Fidelity | In-depth methodology review | Medium | "check methodology", "focus on methods" |
guided |
Originality | Socratic issue-by-issue dialogue | Very High | "guide me to improve", "walk me through issues" |
calibration |
Fidelity | Explicit 3-paper directional readout or default full Calibration Report + tier-scoped disclosure | Medium | "calibrate reviewer", "measure reviewer accuracy" |
academic-pipeline (1 orchestrator + 1 resume mode)
| Mode | Spectrum | Output | Oversight | Triggers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (pipeline) | Balanced | 10-stage orchestrated workflow | Very High | "academic pipeline", "research to paper", "full paper workflow" |
resume_from_passport=<hash> |
Fidelity | Resume a prior pipeline run from a Material Passport reset boundary. Opt-in (ARS_PASSPORT_RESET=1). See academic-pipeline/references/passport_as_reset_boundary.md. |
High | "resume from passport", "continue pipeline from reset boundary" |
Summary
| Metric | Count |
|---|---|
| Total modes | 27 |
| Fidelity | 16 (59%) |
| Balanced | 7 (26%) |
| Originality | 4 (15%) |
Oversight levels
| Level | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Very High | User-led dialogue or mandatory checkpoints at every stage |
| High | User confirms key decisions (RQ, outline, configuration) |
| Medium | Structured format with limited decision points |
| Low | Mechanical/template-driven, minimal human input |