Skill UI

Creates formally structured .docx academic documents with auto-updating TOC, OMML equations, styled headings, footnotes/endnotes, and bibliography formatting for research reports or policy briefs.

This skill automates the entire process of compiling a complex LaTeX academic paper. It orchestrates multiple compilation steps (xelatex, bibtex, xelatex x 2) to render a final PDF from assembled inputs, including abstract, body, and bibliography. Ideal for generating professional, formatted scholarly articles and technical reports.

This tool processes raw search results and bibliography entries to generate a highly structured and curated source pack for long-form academic papers. It categorizes sources into primary, supporting, and weak/excluded sources, ensuring the resulting literature review is reliable, diverse, and methodologically sound. Essential for academic writing workflows.

A comprehensive guide for formatting academic manuscripts for the American Historical Review (AHR). This skill mandates adherence to the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) guidelines where all citations must be placed exclusively in footnotes or endnotes. It strictly prohibits the use of bibliography pages or in-text parenthetical citations, providing detailed rules for citing books, journals, digitized, and especially sensitive archival/manuscript sources.

This comprehensive checklist guides authors through the final steps before submitting a manuscript to The American Historical Review (AHR) via ScholarOne. It ensures adherence to strict double-blind anonymity rules, specific formatting standards (Times New Roman, double-spaced, 8,000-word limit), Chicago manual style notes (no bibliography), and proper handling of image permissions, preventing common submission failures.

This framework guides the creation of high-impact academic literature reviews, transforming a mere annotated bibliography into a cohesive, argumentative essay. It helps researchers impose a unifying 'spine'—such as a taxonomy, process model, or levels of analysis—to make complex psychological fields legible and accessible to non-specialist readers. Ideal for synthesizing scattered research into a single, powerful argument.

This framework guides researchers on how to elevate an academic literature review from a mere annotated bibliography into a cohesive, argumentative piece. It teaches authors to impose a central 'spine'—such as a taxonomy, causal mechanism, or set of analytical levels—to structure the subfield's existing work, thereby generating new insights and defining the field's future agenda. Essential for advanced academic writing and synthesizing large bodies of research.

This comprehensive guide serves as the final pre-submission checklist for publishing in Critical Inquiry (CI). It details crucial, often overlooked requirements—such as adhering to strict word counts (including notes and bibliography), using Microsoft Word format, following Chicago 17th footnotes (no works-cited list), providing separate, high-resolution images, and confirming single-submission status. Using this checklist minimizes common publication errors before hitting 'submit' on Editorial Manager.

This guide offers advanced methodological advice for structuring the 'Related Work' section for top-tier theoretical computer science conferences (like FOCS). It teaches researchers how to treat research history as 'lineage engineering,' requiring precise citation of specific preprints (arXiv version pinning), distinguishing between conference and journal versions, and transparently addressing concurrent results. This ensures the bibliography is rigorous, consistent, and withstands expert review.

A detailed guide on positioning a computer architecture paper within the broader academic literature. It teaches authors to write a 'lineage with structural deltas,' moving beyond mere citation lists. The guidelines cover sweeping multiple databases (like dblp and IEEE Xplore), identifying concrete structural improvements (deltas), and adhering to strict academic rules, such as citing all authors and maintaining un-blinded bibliography integrity.

A detailed methodology guide for authors submitting to highly competitive software engineering venues (like ICSE). It teaches how to structure the Related Work section not as a bibliography, but as a 'delta statement' that explicitly outlines the unique differences and contributions compared to the state-of-the-art across multiple publication lanes (journals, preprints, flagship venues).

This framework guides the creation of a structured, argumentative literature review, preventing the writing from becoming a mere annotated bibliography. By imposing a unifying taxonomy, model, or question sequence, the author transforms scattered research into a cohesive argument about the field. It helps define the 'spine' of the survey, identifies knowledge gaps, and reconciles apparent contradictions in existing literature.