Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

industrial-ai-research

Research industrial AI topics such as predictive maintenance and anomaly detection. Compare papers by methods and publication venues, distinguish preprints from reviewed work, identify conflicting findings and research gaps, or build an evidence-based survey draft.

OriginalShow the original description

Industrial AI literature research with mandatory intake questions, venue-aware source prioritization, structured report outputs, and survey draft generation. Use when the user needs up-to-date research on predictive maintenance, intelligent scheduling, industrial anomaly detection, smart manufacturing, cyber-physical systems, edge AI for automation, or crossover robotics-for-industry topics. Also trigger for adjacent terms: "digital twin", "industrial IoT", "Industry 4.0", "manufacturing AI", "factory automation", "process optimization", or "survey draft" in industrial contexts.

Works withAWS

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Researching recent predictive maintenance literature
  • Comparing industrial anomaly detection methods and evaluations
  • Identifying research gaps in manufacturing AI
  • Drafting a survey on intelligent scheduling

Files included (17)

  • SKILL.md12.7 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml420 B
  • evals/evals.json6.5 KB
  • examples/industrial-anomaly-detection.md562 B
  • examples/intelligent-scheduling.md521 B
  • examples/predictive-maintenance.md536 B
  • examples/survey-predictive-maintenance.md8.8 KB
  • references/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.md3.8 KB
  • references/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.md4.4 KB
  • references/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.md4.0 KB
  • references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.md4.3 KB
  • references/quality-checklist.md1.2 KB
  • references/question-flow.md1.8 KB
  • references/report-modes.md2.9 KB
  • references/source-priority.md2.2 KB
  • references/SURVEY_WRITING_GUIDE.md6.3 KB
  • references/venue-map.md2.9 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Industrial AI Research

Run a lean, source-aware research workflow for Industrial AI.

Capability Summary

  • Structured literature research for Industrial AI and automation topics
  • Mandatory four-question intake before any search or synthesis
  • Venue-aware source prioritization (arXiv, IEEE, automation venues)
  • Four deliverable modes: research-brief, literature-map, venue-ranked survey, research-gap memo
  • Contrarian synthesis pass to surface contradictions and under-explored gaps
  • Survey draft generation: outline-first writing with per-section evidence packs and optional LaTeX export

Triggering

Use this skill when the user wants to:

  • Survey Industrial AI literature on a specific subtopic
  • Compare papers across venues or methods within Industrial AI
  • Identify research gaps in predictive maintenance, scheduling, anomaly detection, or smart manufacturing
  • Produce a structured research report with source-backed evidence
  • Draft a structured survey on an Industrial AI subtopic
  • Produce a survey manuscript with taxonomy, evidence packs, and section-by-section writing

Do Not Use

  • Writing or compiling LaTeX/Typst papers (use latex-paper-en, latex-thesis-zh, or typst-paper). Note: survey-draft mode produces Markdown by default; for LaTeX output, it delegates final formatting to latex-paper-en.
  • Auditing paper quality or formatting (use paper-audit)
  • Systematic reviews or meta-analyses requiring IRB or clinical ethics
  • Topics outside the Industrial AI and automation domain
  • Auditing an existing paper's quality or formatting (use paper-audit)
  • Editing LaTeX/Typst source files (use the appropriate writing skill)

Safety Boundaries

  • Never fabricate paper metadata (title, authors, venue, year, DOI)
  • Never present preprints as peer-reviewed publications
  • Never start synthesis before intake questions are answered
  • Never suppress contradictions or conflicting evidence
  • Never use Tier 4 sources (blogs, press releases) as primary evidence

Core Rules

  1. Ask the user the four intake questions (see references/question-flow.md) before starting any search or synthesis.
  2. Keep the skill workflow in English only, even when the requested report language is not English.
  3. Prefer recent arXiv plus top IEEE and automation venues over generic web articles.
  4. Default to the last 3 years, but keep seminal older work when it is still necessary for context.
  5. Cite every substantive claim and separate verified evidence from inference.
  6. In survey-draft mode, complete all structure and evidence phases before generating any prose. Structure phases produce YAML/tables only.

Intake Contract

Always start by asking the four intake questions defined in references/question-flow.md:

  1. Report language (English / Simplified Chinese / Bilingual summary)
  2. Deliverable mode (research-brief / literature-map / venue-ranked survey / research-gap memo / survey-draft)
  3. Time window (last 12 months / last 3 years / last 5 years / custom)
  4. Industrial AI emphasis (predictive maintenance / intelligent scheduling / industrial anomaly detection / smart manufacturing and process optimization / CPS and edge AI / robotics crossover)

If the user does not choose, default to last 3 years and the subdomain implied by their prompt.

Required Inputs

  • A concrete Industrial AI topic or question.
  • User choices for report language, deliverable mode, time window, and domain emphasis.
  • Optional preferences on peer-reviewed-only filtering, benchmarks vs deployment evidence, or desired output format.

If any intake item is missing, ask the mandatory questions from references/question-flow.md before you search.

Source Strategy

Read these files before searching:

  • references/source-priority.md
  • references/venue-map.md

Primary sources:

  • arXiv: eess.SY, cs.AI
  • IEEE and automation anchors: T-ASE, CASE

Supporting crossover sources:

  • arXiv: cs.RO, cs.LG
  • IEEE robotics venues: ICRA, IROS, RA-L, T-RO
  • Adjacent industrial and control venues listed in references/venue-map.md

When the user asks for the latest work, prefer:

  1. arXiv recent streams for rapid updates
  2. top IEEE and automation venues for stronger publication filtering
  3. secondary crossover venues only when they materially improve coverage

Workflow

Phase 1. Scope

  • Rewrite the request as a precise Industrial AI research objective.
  • Lock the report language, deliverable mode, time window, and domain emphasis.
  • State explicit in-scope and out-of-scope boundaries.

Phase 2. Search Plan

  • Build venue buckets and keyword groups from references/source-priority.md.
  • Separate primary sources from secondary crossover sources.
  • State the recency policy and any seminal-paper exceptions.

Phase 3. Source Collection

  • Gather papers from the prioritized source buckets.
  • Prefer official venue pages, arXiv recent listings, IEEE Xplore landing pages, and publisher or conference pages.
  • Record why each paper was included.

Phase 4. Verification and Triage

  • Check venue quality, publication type, year, and relevance.
  • Remove weak matches, duplicates, and generic blog-style sources.
  • Mark unreviewed preprints as preprints.

Phase 5. Synthesis

  • Cluster the shortlisted papers by problem, method, dataset, deployment setting, and evaluation style.
  • Surface trends, gaps, contradictions, and under-explored opportunities.
  • Run a contrarian pass: what would challenge the dominant conclusion?

Phase 6. Report Assembly

Use the stable report structure from references/report-modes.md.

Every final report must include:

  • search scope
  • source buckets by venue
  • shortlisted papers
  • synthesis of trends and gaps
  • recommended next reading or next experiments

Survey-Draft Workflow (Phases S1–S4)

When the user selects survey-draft, Phases 1–4 (Scope, Search Plan, Source Collection, Verification) execute as normal, then S1–S4 replace the original Phases 5–6.

Phase S1. Outline Building

Read references/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.md.

  • Extract a taxonomy from the verified literature.
  • Build the section skeleton as structured YAML.
  • Present the outline to the user for approval.
  • CHECKPOINT: do not enter S2 until the user approves the outline.

Phase S2. Evidence Pack Assembly

Read references/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.md.

  • Assemble an evidence pack for every H3 subsection.
  • Lock the citation scope for each subsection.
  • Produce structured evidence bundles (no prose).

Phase S3. Section-by-Section Writing

Read references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.md.

  • Draft each H3 independently, grounded in its evidence pack.
  • Run the self-check gate on every H3 (depth, citation scope, tone).
  • Produce one Markdown file per H2 section.

Phase S4. Merge and Quality Gate

Read references/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.md.

  • Merge all section drafts into a single document.
  • Run cross-section consistency checks.
  • Apply the final quality checklist.
  • If the user requested LaTeX output, delegate to latex-paper-en.

Deliverable Modes

Read references/report-modes.md and follow the selected mode exactly.

  • research-brief: short, decision-ready overview
  • literature-map: thematic map across methods and subproblems
  • venue-ranked survey: grouped by source quality and venue tier
  • research-gap memo: open problems, design space, and next-step opportunities
  • survey-draft: taxonomy-driven survey manuscript with outline-first writing and optional LaTeX export

Output Contract

  • State the locked intake choices and any defaults you applied before synthesis.
  • Distinguish verified evidence from inference in every deliverable.
  • Label preprints explicitly as preprints.
  • For non-survey modes, produce a structured report that includes: scope, source buckets, shortlisted papers, synthesis, and next reading or next experiments.
  • For survey-draft, keep stage outputs format-specific:
    • S1: YAML outline only
    • S2: evidence packs or tables only
    • S3: section Markdown drafts grounded in the evidence packs
    • S4: merged Markdown survey with cross-section consistency notes
  • If sources are sparse, inaccessible, or off-scope, say so directly and report the exact fallback you used.

Module Router

ModuleUse whenPrimary actionRead next
researchUser selects any of the 4 report modesExecute Phase 1–6 workflowreferences/report-modes.md
survey-outlineUser selects survey-draft (Phase S1)Build taxonomy and section skeletonreferences/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.md
survey-evidenceOutline approved by user (Phase S2)Assemble per-H3 evidence packsreferences/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.md
survey-writeEvidence packs complete (Phase S3)Draft prose per H3references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.md
survey-mergeAll sections complete (Phase S4)Merge, quality gate, optional LaTeX handoffreferences/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.md

Quality Bar

Read references/quality-checklist.md before finalizing.

Non-negotiable standards:

  • no unsupported claims
  • no venue-blind source mixing
  • no hiding contradictions
  • no synthesized report before intake questions are answered
  • no generic "latest research says" language without source-backed evidence

Error Handling

  • Zero results: Broaden keywords, relax the time window by one tier, and try adjacent venues. If still empty, report the negative result with the exact queries attempted.
  • Off-subdomain topic: State that the topic falls outside Industrial AI scope, suggest the closest supported subdomain, and ask the user whether to proceed or abort.
  • Inaccessible databases: Note which sources were unreachable, proceed with available sources, and flag the gap in the final report.
  • Too few papers (<5 shortlisted): Lower the time window threshold, include Tier 2/3 venues, and explicitly note the thin evidence base in the synthesis.

Reference Map

FilePhaseWhen to read
references/question-flow.mdIntakeBefore asking the user any questions
references/source-priority.mdSearch PlanBefore building venue buckets
references/venue-map.mdSearch PlanBefore selecting specific venues
references/report-modes.mdReport AssemblyBefore structuring the final output
references/quality-checklist.mdReport AssemblyBefore finalizing the report
references/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.mdSurvey S1When building the survey outline
references/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.mdSurvey S2When assembling evidence packs
references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.mdSurvey S3When drafting survey sections
references/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.mdSurvey S4When merging and running quality gate
references/SURVEY_WRITING_GUIDE.mdSurvey S1–S4Survey writing philosophy reference

Examples

  • examples/predictive-maintenance.md
  • examples/intelligent-scheduling.md
  • examples/industrial-anomaly-detection.md
  • examples/survey-predictive-maintenance.md

Example Requests

  • “Research recent predictive maintenance papers from the last 3 years and return a research-brief.”
  • “Compare industrial anomaly detection papers across arXiv and IEEE automation venues, and show contradictions in evaluation setups.”
  • “Draft a survey on intelligent scheduling for researchers new to the subfield, but stop after the YAML outline for approval.”
  • “My topic is warehouse picking robotics. If that is outside scope, tell me the closest supported Industrial AI framing and proceed only with that.”

Boundaries

This v1 skill does not implement:

  • systematic review mode
  • meta-analysis
  • IRB-heavy or clinical ethics branches
  • standalone automation scripts

If the user needs those, state the boundary and continue with the closest supported research mode.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

a1

FreeSummary

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.8KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a2

FreeSummary

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.8KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a5

FreeSummary

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.8KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

academic-paper

FreeSummary

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.8KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.8KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.8KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by brycewang-stanford

Report a problem with this skill