Claude-scholar paper-self-review

This skill should be used when the user asks to "review paper quality", "check paper completeness", "validate paper structure", "self-review before submission", or mentions systematic paper quality checking. Provides comprehensive quality assurance checklist for academic papers.

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/paper-self-review" ~/.claude/skills/galaxy-dawn-claude-scholar-paper-self-review && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/paper-self-review/SKILL.md
source content

Paper Self-Review

A systematic paper quality checking tool that helps researchers conduct comprehensive self-review before submission.

Core Features

1. Structure Review

Check whether all sections of the paper are complete and conform to academic standards:

  • Does the Abstract include problem, method, results, and contributions?
  • Does the Introduction clearly articulate research motivation and background?
  • Is the Method detailed enough to be reproducible?
  • Do the Results sufficiently support the conclusions?
  • Does the Discussion address limitations and future work?

2. Logic Consistency Check

Verify the logical coherence of the paper:

  • Do research questions match the methodology?
  • Does the experimental design support the research hypotheses?
  • Are result interpretations reasonable?
  • Are conclusions supported by evidence?

3. Citation Completeness

Check the completeness and accuracy of citations:

  • Are all citations present in the references?
  • Is the reference format consistent?
  • Are key related works cited?
  • Do citations accurately reflect the original content?

4. Figure/Table Quality

Evaluate the quality and effectiveness of figures and tables:

  • Do all figures/tables have clear titles and captions?
  • Do figures/tables support the text narrative?
  • Are figures/tables clear and readable?
  • Do formats comply with journal/conference requirements?

5. Writing Clarity

Check writing clarity and readability:

  • Is the language concise and clear?
  • Is technical terminology used appropriately?
  • Are sentence structures clear?
  • Is paragraph organization logical?

Quality Checklist

Use this checklist for systematic paper self-review:

Paper Quality Checklist:
- [ ] Abstract includes problem, method, results, contributions
- [ ] Introduction clearly states research motivation
- [ ] Method is reproducible
- [ ] Results support conclusions
- [ ] Discussion addresses limitations
- [ ] All figures/tables have captions
- [ ] Citations are complete and accurate

When to Use

Use this skill in the following scenarios:

  • Pre-submission check - Final review before submitting to a journal or conference
  • After first draft - Systematic review after completing the first draft
  • Before advisor review - Self-check before requesting advisor feedback to improve quality
  • Post-revision verification - After revising based on reviewer comments, verify all issues are addressed
  • Collaborator review - Quality check before sending to collaborators

Review Process

Follow these steps for systematic paper review:

Step 1: Structure Review

Start with the overall structure, checking if all sections are complete and logically coherent.

Step 2: Content Review

Dive into each section, checking content accuracy and completeness.

Step 3: Citation Check

Verify the completeness and accuracy of all citations.

Step 4: Figure/Table Review

Check the quality and captions of all figures and tables.

Step 5: Writing Quality

Review language expression and writing clarity.

Step 6: Final Checklist

Use the quality checklist for final verification.

Best Practices

Review Timing

  • Spaced review - Wait 1-2 days after completing the draft before reviewing to maintain objectivity
  • Multiple rounds - Conduct multiple review rounds, focusing on different aspects each time
  • Print review - Print a hard copy for review; issues are easier to spot on paper

Review Techniques

  • Reverse reading - Read from conclusion backwards to check logical coherence
  • Read aloud - Reading the paper aloud helps identify language issues
  • Reviewer perspective - Assume you are a reviewer and read critically

Common Issues

  • Abstract too brief or too verbose
  • Introduction lacks clear research question statement
  • Method lacks sufficient detail for reproduction
  • Results lack statistical significance tests
  • Discussion doesn't address research limitations
  • Figures/tables lack clear titles and captions
  • Inconsistent citation formatting

Summary

The Paper Self-Review skill provides a systematic paper quality checking process, helping researchers identify and resolve issues before submission, improving paper quality and acceptance rates.

Reference Files

Load only what is needed:

  • references/SECTION-CHECKLIST.md
    - section-by-section review questions
  • references/FINAL-VERDICT.md
    - how to summarize submission readiness and blocking issues
  • examples/example-self-review.md
    - example review output