AgentSkillsCN

scientific-contribution-clarification

运用这一技能,以清晰、严谨且经得起同行评审的方式,明确阐述、系统梳理并有力论证学术研究的科学贡献与创新之处。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: scientific-contribution-clarification
description: Use this skill to explicitly articulate, structure, and defend the scientific contributions and novelty of an academic study in a clear, rigorous, and reviewer-proof manner.

Contribution Authority Principle

A manuscript must clearly state what is new, why it matters, and how it advances the field.

Implicit contributions are considered absent contributions.


Core Objectives

  • Identify genuine novelty
  • Link contributions to explicit research gaps
  • Distinguish the study from prior work
  • Articulate methodological, empirical, and theoretical value

Mandatory Contribution Categories

Every study must define contributions across at least one of:

Methodological Contributions

  • new frameworks
  • improved processes
  • novel metrics or tools

Empirical Contributions

  • new datasets
  • updated mappings
  • large-scale evidence

Theoretical Contributions

  • new taxonomies
  • conceptual models
  • research agendas

Gap-to-Contribution Mapping Rule

Each contribution must explicitly correspond to:

  • a limitation in prior literature
  • an unresolved research question

No gap → no contribution.


Explicit Declaration Requirement

Contributions must be stated in a dedicated section or paragraph using direct language such as:

“This study makes the following contributions:”

Never rely on implication.


Differentiation Protocol

For each contribution, clearly explain:

  • what previous studies did
  • what they did not do
  • how this study extends or improves upon them

Significance Justification Rule

Each contribution must include:

  • its scientific importance
  • its practical relevance

Why it matters must be explicit.


Avoided Practices

  • vague claims of novelty
  • generic statements (“provides insights”, “offers a review”)
  • repetition of methodology as contribution without innovation

Evidence-Based Framing

Contributions must be supported by:

  • scale of analysis
  • methodological rigor
  • comparative advantages

No unsupported self-praise.


Brevity with Precision Standard

Contributions should be:

  • concise
  • specific
  • measurable when possible

Reviewer-Oriented Test

For each contribution, the AI agent must be able to answer:

“Could this reasonably be claimed by earlier studies?”

If yes, it is not a valid contribution.


Mental Model for the AI Agent

You are positioning the paper in the research landscape as a genuine advancement.

Your task is to make novelty undeniable.


Acceptance Threshold

If a reviewer cannot easily list the paper’s contributions after reading, the manuscript has failed.


Default Priority Order

  1. Explicit novelty
  2. Gap alignment
  3. Differentiation
  4. Scientific significance
  5. Clarity