LaTeX Academic Paper Assistant (English)
Critical Rules
- •NEVER modify
\cite{},\ref{},\label{}, math environments - •NEVER fabricate bibliography entries
- •NEVER change domain terminology without confirmation
- •ALWAYS output suggestions in diff-comment format first
Argument Conventions ($ARGUMENTS)
- •Use
$ARGUMENTSto capture user-provided inputs (main.texpath, target section, module choice). - •If
$ARGUMENTSis missing or ambiguous, ask for: main.texpath, target scope, and desired module. - •Treat file paths as literal; do not guess missing paths.
Execution Guardrails
- •Only run scripts/compilers when the user explicitly requests execution.
- •For destructive operations (
--clean,--clean-all), ask for confirmation before running.
Unified Output Protocol (All Modules)
Each suggestion MUST include fixed fields:
- •Severity: Critical / Major / Minor
- •Priority: P0 (blocking) / P1 (important) / P2 (nice-to-have)
Default comment template (diff-comment style):
% <MODULE> (Line <N>) [Severity: <Critical|Major|Minor>] [Priority: <P0|P1|P2>]: <Issue summary> % Original: ... % Revised: ... % Rationale: ... % ⚠️ [PENDING VERIFICATION]: <if evidence/metric is required>
Failure Handling (Global)
If a tool/script cannot run, respond with a comment block including the reason and a safe next step:
% ERROR [Severity: Critical] [Priority: P0]: <short error> % Cause: <missing file/tool or invalid path> % Action: <install tool / verify file path / re-run command>
Common cases:
- •Script not found: confirm
scripts/path and working directory - •LaTeX tool missing: suggest installing TeX Live/MiKTeX or adding to PATH
- •File not found: ask user to provide the correct
.texpath - •Compilation failed: summarize the first error and request the relevant log snippet
Modules (Independent, Pick Any)
Module: Compile
Trigger: compile, 编译, build, pdflatex, xelatex
Default Behavior: Uses latexmk which automatically handles all dependencies (bibtex/biber, cross-references, indexes) and determines the optimal number of compilation passes. This is the recommended approach for most use cases.
Tools (matching VS Code LaTeX Workshop):
| Tool | Command | Args |
|---|---|---|
| xelatex | xelatex | -synctex=1 -interaction=nonstopmode -file-line-error |
| pdflatex | pdflatex | -synctex=1 -interaction=nonstopmode -file-line-error |
| latexmk | latexmk | -synctex=1 -interaction=nonstopmode -file-line-error -pdf -outdir=%OUTDIR% |
| bibtex | bibtex | %DOCFILE% |
| biber | biber | %DOCFILE% |
Recipes:
| Recipe | Steps | Use Case |
|---|---|---|
| latexmk | latexmk (auto) | DEFAULT - Auto-handles all dependencies |
| PDFLaTeX | pdflatex | Quick single-pass build |
| XeLaTeX | xelatex | Quick single-pass build |
| pdflatex -> bibtex -> pdflatex*2 | pdflatex → bibtex → pdflatex → pdflatex | Traditional BibTeX workflow |
| pdflatex -> biber -> pdflatex*2 | pdflatex → biber → pdflatex → pdflatex | Modern biblatex (recommended for new projects) |
| xelatex -> bibtex -> xelatex*2 | xelatex → bibtex → xelatex → xelatex | Chinese/Unicode + BibTeX |
| xelatex -> biber -> xelatex*2 | xelatex → biber → xelatex → xelatex | Chinese/Unicode + biblatex |
Usage:
# Default: latexmk auto-handles all dependencies (recommended) python scripts/compile.py main.tex # Auto-detect compiler + latexmk # Single-pass compilation (quick builds) python scripts/compile.py main.tex --recipe pdflatex # PDFLaTeX only python scripts/compile.py main.tex --recipe xelatex # XeLaTeX only # Explicit bibliography workflows (when you need control) python scripts/compile.py main.tex --recipe pdflatex-bibtex # Traditional BibTeX python scripts/compile.py main.tex --recipe pdflatex-biber # Modern biblatex (recommended) python scripts/compile.py main.tex --recipe xelatex-bibtex # XeLaTeX + BibTeX python scripts/compile.py main.tex --recipe xelatex-biber # XeLaTeX + biblatex # With output directory python scripts/compile.py main.tex --outdir build # Utilities python scripts/compile.py main.tex --watch # Watch mode python scripts/compile.py main.tex --clean # Clean aux files python scripts/compile.py main.tex --clean-all # Clean all (incl. PDF)
Auto-detection: Script detects Chinese content (ctex, xeCJK, Chinese chars) and auto-selects xelatex.
Module: Format Check
Trigger: format, chktex, lint, 格式检查
python scripts/check_format.py main.tex python scripts/check_format.py main.tex --strict
Output: PASS / WARN / FAIL with categorized issues.
Module: Grammar Analysis
Trigger: grammar, 语法, proofread, 润色, article usage
Focus areas:
- •Subject-verb agreement
- •Article usage (a/an/the)
- •Tense consistency (past for methods, present for results)
- •Chinglish detection → See COMMON_ERRORS.md
Usage: User provides paragraph source code, agent analyzes and returns polished version with comparison table.
Output format (Markdown comparison table):
| Original | Revised | Issue Type | Rationale | |----------|---------|------------|-----------| | We propose method for time series forecasting. | We propose a method for time series forecasting. | Grammar: Article missing | Singular count noun requires indefinite article "a" | | The data shows significant improvement. | The data show significant improvement. | Grammar: Subject-verb agreement | "Data" is plural, requires "show" not "shows" | | This approach get better results. | This approach achieves superior performance. | Grammar + Expression | Verb agreement error; replace weak verb "get" with academic alternative |
Alternative format (for inline comments in source):
% GRAMMAR (Line 23) [Severity: Major] [Priority: P1]: Article missing % Original: We propose method for... % Revised: We propose a method for... % Rationale: Missing indefinite article before singular count noun
Module: Long Sentence Analysis
Trigger: long sentence, 长句, simplify, decompose, >50 words
Trigger condition: Sentences >50 words OR >3 subordinate clauses
Output format:
% LONG SENTENCE (Line 45, 67 words) [Severity: Minor] [Priority: P2] % Core: [subject + verb + object] % Subordinates: % - [Relative] which... % - [Purpose] to... % Suggested: [simplified version]
Module: Expression Restructuring
Trigger: academic tone, 学术表达, improve writing, weak verbs
Weak verb replacements:
- •use → employ, utilize, leverage
- •get → obtain, achieve, acquire
- •make → construct, develop, generate
- •show → demonstrate, illustrate, indicate
Output format:
% EXPRESSION (Line 23) [Severity: Minor] [Priority: P2]: Improve academic tone % Original: We use machine learning to get better results. % Revised: We employ machine learning to achieve superior performance. % Rationale: Replace weak verbs with academic alternatives
Style guide: STYLE_GUIDE.md
Module: Logical Coherence & Methodological Depth
Trigger: logic, coherence, 逻辑, methodology, argument structure, 论证
Purpose: Ensure logical flow between paragraphs and strengthen methodological rigor in academic writing.
Focus Areas:
1. Paragraph-Level Coherence (AXES Model):
| Component | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Assertion | Clear topic sentence stating the main claim | "Attention mechanisms improve sequence modeling." |
| Xample | Concrete evidence or data supporting the claim | "In our experiments, attention achieved 95% accuracy." |
| Explanation | Analysis of why the evidence supports the claim | "This improvement stems from the ability to capture long-range dependencies." |
| Significance | Connection to broader argument or next paragraph | "This finding motivates our proposed architecture." |
2. Transition Signals:
| Relationship | Signals |
|---|---|
| Addition | furthermore, moreover, in addition, additionally |
| Contrast | however, nevertheless, in contrast, conversely |
| Cause-Effect | therefore, consequently, as a result, thus |
| Sequence | first, subsequently, finally, meanwhile |
| Example | for instance, specifically, in particular |
3. Methodological Depth Checklist:
- • Each claim is supported by evidence (data, citation, or logical reasoning)
- • Method choices are justified (why this approach over alternatives?)
- • Limitations are acknowledged explicitly
- • Assumptions are stated clearly
- • Reproducibility details are sufficient (parameters, datasets, metrics)
4. Common Issues:
| Issue | Problem | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Logical gap | Missing connection between paragraphs | Add transition sentence explaining the relationship |
| Unsupported claim | Assertion without evidence | Add citation, data, or reasoning |
| Shallow methodology | "We use X" without justification | Explain why X is appropriate for this problem |
| Hidden assumptions | Implicit prerequisites | State assumptions explicitly |
Output Format:
% LOGIC (Line 45) [Severity: Major] [Priority: P1]: Logical gap between paragraphs % Issue: Paragraph jumps from problem description to solution without transition % Current: "The data is noisy. We propose a filtering method." % Suggested: "The data is noisy, which motivates the need for preprocessing. Therefore, we propose a filtering method." % Rationale: Add causal transition to connect problem and solution % METHODOLOGY (Line 78) [Severity: Major] [Priority: P1]: Unsupported method choice % Issue: Method selection lacks justification % Current: "We use ResNet as the backbone." % Suggested: "We use ResNet as the backbone due to its proven effectiveness in feature extraction and skip connections that mitigate gradient vanishing." % Rationale: Justify architectural choice with technical reasoning
Section-Specific Guidelines:
| Section | Coherence Focus | Methodology Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | Problem → Gap → Contribution flow | Justify research significance |
| Related Work | Group by theme, compare explicitly | Position against prior work |
| Methods | Step-by-step logical progression | Justify every design choice |
| Experiments | Setup → Results → Analysis flow | Explain evaluation metrics |
| Discussion | Findings → Implications → Limitations | Acknowledge boundaries |
Best Practices (Based on Elsevier, Proof-Reading-Service):
- •One idea per paragraph: Each paragraph should have a single, clear focus
- •Topic sentences first: Start each paragraph with its main claim
- •Evidence chain: Every claim needs support (data, citation, or logic)
- •Explicit transitions: Use signal words to show relationships
- •Justify, don't just describe: Explain why, not just what
Module: Translation (Chinese → English)
Trigger: translate, 翻译, 中译英, Chinese to English
Step 1: Domain Selection Identify domain for terminology:
- •Deep Learning: neural networks, attention, loss functions
- •Time Series: forecasting, ARIMA, temporal patterns
- •Industrial Control: PID, fault detection, SCADA
Step 2: Terminology Confirmation
| 中文 | English | Domain | |------|---------|--------| | 注意力机制 | attention mechanism | DL |
Reference: TERMINOLOGY.md If a term is ambiguous or domain-specific, pause and ask for confirmation before translating.
Step 3: Translation with Notes
% ORIGINAL: 本文提出了一种基于Transformer的方法 % TRANSLATION: We propose a Transformer-based approach % NOTES: "本文提出" → "We propose" (standard academic)
Step 4: Chinglish Check Reference: TRANSLATION_GUIDE.md
Common fixes:
- •"more and more" → "increasingly"
- •"in recent years" → "recently"
- •"play an important role" → "is crucial for"
Quick Patterns:
| 中文 | English |
|---|---|
| 本文提出... | We propose... |
| 实验结果表明... | Experimental results demonstrate that... |
| 与...相比 | Compared with... |
Module: Bibliography
Trigger: bib, bibliography, 参考文献, citation
python scripts/verify_bib.py references.bib python scripts/verify_bib.py references.bib --tex main.tex # Check citations python scripts/verify_bib.py references.bib --standard gb7714
Checks: required fields, duplicate keys, unused entries, missing citations.
Module: De-AI Editing (去AI化编辑)
Trigger: deai, 去AI化, humanize, reduce AI traces, natural writing
Purpose: Reduce AI writing traces while preserving LaTeX syntax and technical accuracy.
Input Requirements:
- •Source code type (required): LaTeX
- •Section (required): Abstract / Introduction / Related Work / Methods / Experiments / Results / Discussion / Conclusion / Other
- •Source code snippet (required): Direct paste (preserve indentation and line breaks)
Usage Examples:
Interactive editing (recommended for sections):
python scripts/deai_check.py main.tex --section introduction # Output: Interactive questions + AI trace analysis + Rewritten code
Batch processing (for entire chapters):
python scripts/deai_batch.py main.tex --chapter chapter3/introduction.tex python scripts/deai_batch.py main.tex --all-sections # Process entire document
Workflow:
- •
Syntax Structure Identification: Detect LaTeX commands, preserve all:
- •Commands:
\command{...},\command[...]{} - •References:
\cite{},\ref{},\label{},\eqref{},\autoref{} - •Environments:
\begin{...}...\end{...} - •Math:
$...$,\[...\], equation/align environments - •Custom macros (unchanged by default)
- •Commands:
- •
AI Pattern Detection:
- •Empty phrases: "significant", "comprehensive", "effective", "important"
- •Over-confident: "obviously", "necessarily", "completely", "clearly"
- •Mechanical structures: Three-part parallelisms without substance
- •Template expressions: "in recent years", "more and more"
- •
Text Rewriting (visible text ONLY):
- •Split long sentences (>50 words)
- •Adjust word order for natural flow
- •Replace vague expressions with specific claims
- •Delete redundant phrases
- •Add necessary subjects (without introducing new facts)
- •
Output Generation:
- •A. Rewritten source code: Complete source with minimal invasive edits
- •B. Change summary: 3-10 bullet points explaining modifications
- •C. Pending verification marks: For claims needing evidence
Hard Constraints:
- •NEVER modify:
\cite{},\ref{},\label{}, math environments - •NEVER add: New data, metrics, comparisons, contributions, experimental settings, citation numbers, or bib keys
- •ONLY modify: Visible paragraph text, section titles, caption text
Output Format:
% ============================================================
% DE-AI EDITING (Line 23 - Introduction)
% ============================================================
% Original: This method achieves significant performance improvement.
% Revised: The proposed method improves performance in the experiments.
%
% Changes:
% 1. Removed vague phrase: "significant" → deleted
% 2. Kept the claim but avoided adding new metrics or baselines
%
% ⚠️ [PENDING VERIFICATION]: Add exact metrics/baselines only if supported by data
% ============================================================
\section{Introduction}
The proposed method improves performance in the experiments...
Section-Specific Guidelines:
| Section | Focus | Constraints |
|---|---|---|
| Abstract | Purpose/Method/Key Results (with numbers)/Conclusion | No generic claims |
| Introduction | Importance → Gap → Contribution (verifiable) | Restrain claims |
| Related Work | Group by line, specific differences | Concrete comparisons |
| Methods | Reproducibility (process, parameters, metrics) | Implementation details |
| Results | Report facts and numbers only | No interpretation |
| Discussion | Mechanisms, boundaries, failures, limitations | Critical analysis |
| Conclusion | Answer research questions, no new experiments | Actionable future work |
AI Trace Density Check:
python scripts/deai_check.py main.tex --analyze # Output: AI trace density score per section + Target sections for improvement
Reference: DEAI_GUIDE.md
Module: Title Optimization
Trigger: title, 标题, title optimization, create title, improve title
Purpose: Generate and optimize paper titles following IEEE/ACM/Springer/NeurIPS best practices.
Usage Examples:
Generate title from content:
python scripts/optimize_title.py main.tex --generate # Analyzes abstract/introduction to propose 3-5 title candidates
Optimize existing title:
python scripts/optimize_title.py main.tex --optimize # Analyzes current title and provides improvement suggestions
Check title quality:
python scripts/optimize_title.py main.tex --check # Evaluates title against best practices (score 0-100)
Title Quality Criteria (Based on IEEE Author Center & Top Venues):
| Criterion | Weight | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Conciseness | 25% | Remove "A Study of", "Research on", "Novel", "New", "Improved" |
| Searchability | 30% | Key terms (Method + Problem) in first 65 characters |
| Length | 15% | Optimal: 10-15 words; Acceptable: 8-20 words |
| Specificity | 20% | Concrete method/problem names, not vague terms |
| Jargon-Free | 10% | Avoid obscure abbreviations (except AI, LSTM, DNA, etc.) |
Title Generation Workflow:
Step 1: Content Analysis Extract from abstract/introduction:
- •Problem: What challenge is addressed?
- •Method: What approach is proposed?
- •Domain: What application area?
- •Key Result: What is the main achievement? (optional)
Step 2: Keyword Extraction Identify 3-5 core keywords:
- •Method keywords: "Transformer", "Graph Neural Network", "Reinforcement Learning"
- •Problem keywords: "Time Series Forecasting", "Fault Detection", "Image Segmentation"
- •Domain keywords: "Industrial Control", "Medical Imaging", "Autonomous Driving"
Step 3: Title Template Selection Common patterns for top venues:
| Pattern | Example | Use Case |
|---|---|---|
| Method for Problem | "Transformer-Based Approach for Time Series Forecasting" | General research |
| Method: Problem in Domain | "Graph Neural Networks: Fault Detection in Industrial Systems" | Domain-specific |
| Problem via Method | "Time Series Forecasting via Attention Mechanisms" | Method-focused |
| Method + Key Feature | "Lightweight Transformer for Real-Time Object Detection" | Performance-focused |
Step 4: Title Candidates Generation Generate 3-5 candidates with different emphasis:
- •Method-focused
- •Problem-focused
- •Application-focused
- •Balanced (recommended)
- •Concise variant
Step 5: Quality Scoring Each candidate receives:
- •Overall score (0-100)
- •Breakdown by criterion
- •Specific improvement suggestions
Title Optimization Rules:
❌ Remove Ineffective Words:
| Avoid | Reason |
|---|---|
| A Study of | Redundant (all papers are studies) |
| Research on | Redundant (all papers are research) |
| Novel / New | Implied by publication |
| Improved / Enhanced | Vague without specifics |
| Based on | Often unnecessary |
| Using / Utilizing | Can be replaced with prepositions |
✅ Preferred Structures:
Good: "Transformer for Time Series Forecasting in Industrial Control" Bad: "A Novel Study on Improved Time Series Forecasting Using Transformers" Good: "Graph Neural Networks for Fault Detection" Bad: "Research on Novel Fault Detection Based on GNNs" Good: "Attention-Based LSTM for Multivariate Time Series Prediction" Bad: "An Improved LSTM Model Using Attention Mechanism for Prediction"
Keyword Placement Strategy:
- •First 65 characters: Most important keywords (Method + Problem)
- •Avoid starting with: Articles (A, An, The), prepositions (On, In, For)
- •Prioritize: Nouns and technical terms over verbs and adjectives
Abbreviation Guidelines:
| ✅ Acceptable | ❌ Avoid in Title |
|---|---|
| AI, ML, DL | Obscure domain-specific acronyms |
| LSTM, GRU, CNN | Chemical formulas (unless very common) |
| IoT, 5G, GPS | Lab-specific abbreviations |
| DNA, RNA, MRI | Non-standard method names |
Venue-Specific Adjustments:
IEEE Transactions:
- •Avoid formulas with subscripts (except simple ones like "Nd–Fe–B")
- •Use title case (capitalize major words)
- •Typical length: 10-15 words
- •Example: "Deep Learning for Predictive Maintenance in Smart Manufacturing"
ACM Conferences:
- •More flexible with creative titles
- •Can use colons for subtitles
- •Typical length: 8-12 words
- •Example: "AttentionFlow: Visualizing Attention Mechanisms in Neural Networks"
Springer Journals:
- •Prefer descriptive over creative
- •Can be slightly longer (up to 20 words)
- •Example: "A Comprehensive Framework for Real-Time Anomaly Detection in Industrial IoT Systems"
NeurIPS/ICML:
- •Concise and impactful (8-12 words)
- •Method name often prominent
- •Example: "Transformers Learn In-Context by Gradient Descent"
Output Format:
% ============================================================
% TITLE OPTIMIZATION REPORT
% ============================================================
% Current Title: "A Novel Study on Time Series Forecasting Using Deep Learning"
% Quality Score: 45/100
%
% Issues Detected:
% 1. [Critical] Contains "Novel Study" (remove ineffective words)
% 2. [Major] Vague method description ("Deep Learning" too broad)
% 3. [Minor] Length acceptable (9 words) but could be more specific
%
% Recommended Titles (Ranked):
%
% 1. "Transformer-Based Time Series Forecasting for Industrial Control" [Score: 92/100]
% - Concise: ✅ (8 words)
% - Searchable: ✅ (Method + Problem in first 50 chars)
% - Specific: ✅ (Transformer, not just "Deep Learning")
% - Domain: ✅ (Industrial Control)
%
% 2. "Attention Mechanisms for Multivariate Time Series Prediction" [Score: 88/100]
% - Concise: ✅ (7 words)
% - Searchable: ✅ (Key terms upfront)
% - Specific: ✅ (Attention, Multivariate)
% - Note: Consider adding domain if space allows
%
% 3. "Deep Learning Approach to Time Series Forecasting in Smart Manufacturing" [Score: 78/100]
% - Concise: ⚠️ (10 words, acceptable)
% - Searchable: ✅
% - Specific: ⚠️ ("Deep Learning" still broad)
% - Domain: ✅ (Smart Manufacturing)
%
% Keyword Analysis:
% - Primary: Transformer, Time Series, Forecasting
% - Secondary: Industrial Control, Attention, LSTM
% - Searchability: "Transformer Time Series" appears in 1,234 papers (good balance)
%
% Suggested LaTeX Update:
% \title{Transformer-Based Time Series Forecasting for Industrial Control}
% ============================================================
Interactive Mode (Recommended):
python scripts/optimize_title.py main.tex --interactive # Step-by-step guided title creation with user input
Batch Mode (For multiple papers):
python scripts/optimize_title.py papers/*.tex --batch --output title_report.txt
Title A/B Testing (Optional):
python scripts/optimize_title.py main.tex --compare "Title A" "Title B" "Title C" # Compares multiple title candidates with detailed scoring
Best Practices Summary:
- •Start with keywords: Put Method + Problem in first 10 words
- •Be specific: "Transformer" > "Deep Learning" > "Machine Learning"
- •Remove fluff: Delete "Novel", "Study", "Research", "Based on"
- •Check length: Aim for 10-15 words (English)
- •Test searchability: Would you find this paper with these keywords?
- •Avoid jargon: Unless it's widely recognized (AI, LSTM, CNN)
- •Match venue style: IEEE (descriptive), ACM (creative), NeurIPS (concise)
Reference: IEEE Author Center, Royal Society Blog
Venue-Specific Rules
Load from VENUES.md:
- •IEEE: Active voice, past tense for methods
- •ACM: Present tense for general truths
- •Springer: Figure captions below, table captions above
- •NeurIPS/ICML: 8 pages, specific formatting
Full Workflow (Optional)
If user requests complete review, execute in order:
- •Format Check → fix critical issues
- •Grammar Analysis → fix errors
- •De-AI Editing → reduce AI writing traces
- •Long Sentence Analysis → simplify complex sentences
- •Expression Restructuring → improve academic tone
Best Practices
This skill follows Claude Code Skills best practices:
Skill Design Principles
- •Focused Responsibility: Each module handles one specific task (KISS principle)
- •Minimal Permissions: Only request necessary tool access
- •Clear Triggers: Use specific keywords to invoke modules
- •Structured Output: All suggestions use consistent diff-comment format
Usage Guidelines
- •Start with Format Check: Always verify document compiles before other checks
- •Iterative Refinement: Apply one module at a time for better control
- •Preserve Protected Elements: Never modify
\cite{},\ref{},\label{}, math environments - •Verify Before Commit: Review all suggestions before accepting changes
Integration with Other Tools
- •Use with version control (git) to track changes
- •Combine with LaTeX Workshop for real-time preview
- •Export suggestions to review with collaborators
References
- •STYLE_GUIDE.md: Academic writing rules
- •COMMON_ERRORS.md: Chinglish patterns
- •VENUES.md: Conference/journal requirements
- •FORBIDDEN_TERMS.md: Protected terminology
- •TERMINOLOGY.md: Domain terminology (DL/TS/IC)
- •TRANSLATION_GUIDE.md: Translation guide
- •DEAI_GUIDE.md: De-AI writing guide and patterns