「peer review」の検索結果

Publication Specialist - Writing, Review, Pre-registration & Quality Assurance Light VS applied: Avoids template-based writing + audience-specific message design Absorbed G3 (Peer Review Strategist), G4 (Pre-registration Composer), F1-F3 (Quality functions) capabilities Use when: writing abstracts, creating summaries, peer review response, pre-registration, reporting checklists, reproducibility Triggers: abstract, plain language, press release, summary, communication, peer review, revision, pre-registration, OSF, PRISMA, CONSORT, reproducibility

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Scrum-inspired paper review, revision, and R&R workflow. Handles docx/tex/md/PDF in English or Chinese. Auto-detects manuscript stage, estimates sprint count, runs multi-lens review (Contribution/Rigor/Writing/Editor), generates prioritized revision backlog, exports MD/DOCX/PDF/HTML reports. Use when asked to review a paper, revise based on reviewer comments, handle R&R, respond to peer review, plan paper revision sprints, or when user types /ps or /papersprint.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use to understand how Agricultural Systems (AgSy) evaluates a manuscript — single-anonymized peer review with a minimum of two reviewers and an editor decision, desk screening for fit and systems content, what reviewers weigh, and the rapid-review track for Perspectives. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Conduct a peer review of research methodology, experimental design, and manuscript quality. Covers methodology evaluation, statistical appropriateness, reproducibility assessment, bias identification, and constructive feedback. Use when reviewing a manuscript, preprint, or internal research report, evaluating a research proposal or study protocol, assessing evidence quality behind a claim, or reviewing a thesis chapter or dissertation section.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review an author's manuscript, its argument and paragraph structure, analyze reviewer comments, draft rebuttals, and verify revisions. Use for self-review, structural edit plans, simulated reviewer objections, author responses, revision closure, and submission-readiness assessment. Formal assigned peer review is outside this skill; manuscript edits and final figures/tables use their owning skills.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when the user requests to review, analyze, critique, or summarize academic papers, research articles, preprints, or scientific publications. Supports comprehensive structured reviews covering methodology assessment, contribution evaluation, literature positioning, and constructive feedback generation. Trigger on queries involving paper URLs, uploaded PDFs, arXiv links, or requests like "review this paper", "analyze this research", "summarize this study", or "write a peer review".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

ARS-Codex research, writing, manuscript review, study screening, and experiments. Use for deep research, literature or systematic reviews, meta-analysis, research questions, drafts, revisions, roadmaps, abstracts, citations, integrity checks, peer review, research-to-paper. Screen records: sr-screener. Citation triggers: check citations, look over the refs, 檢查引用, 檢查參考文獻, 인용 확인, 인용 형식 검사. Korean: 논문 심사, 논문 수정, 초록 작성, 체계적 문헌고찰, 연구부터 논문까지. Español: revisión de literatura, revisar artículo, enmendar mi artículo, escribir resumen, investigación a artículo. Also use for ARS aliases: /ars-plan, /ars-outline, /ars-abstract, /ars-lit-review, /ars-citation-check, /ars-disclosure, /ars-format-convert, /ars-3w, /ars-revision-coach, /ars-revision, /ars-reviewer, /ars-mark-read, /ars-unmark-read, /ars-cache-invalidate, /ars-rebuttal-audit, /ars-full. Prompts, references, templates, and contracts live under ars/.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Draft, audit, or revise point-by-point reviewer response letters for Nature-family manuscript revisions. Use when the user provides reviewer comments, editor decision letters, revision notes, response drafts, or asks how to respond to major/minor revision requests, rebuttal letters, response to reviewers, peer-review reports, 审稿意见回复, 逐点回复, 修回信, 大修回复, 小修回复, or 如何回复 reviewer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when a phase plan should be peer-reviewed by other AI CLIs before execution, or the user asks for a cross-AI review. Invokes Gemini, Claude, Codex, or OpenCode and writes REVIEWS.md for /gsd-plan-phase --reviews.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review a plan by running internal reviews and a peer review in parallel and returning combined findings. Use when the user asks to "review my plan", "check my plan", "critique my plan", or wants feedback on a plan.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when reviewing someone else's manuscript for a journal, such as after a review invitation or for a revised R1/R2 version. Drafts a structured, constructive review in the journal's format. Never for your own manuscript; that is /self-review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

On-demand journal peer review simulation expert — supports 7 research paradigms (experimental/computational/empirical_survey/interpretive/mixed_methods/systematic_review/interdisciplinary) with 6-step review workflow, outputting targeted revision suggestions based on journal-specific review standards.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Iterative manuscript improvement workflow where a reviewer agent critiques, an author agent revises, a verifier checks the revision, and the loop repeats until acceptance or a human-pause condition is reached. Use for virtual peer review, reviewer-author revision loops, rebuttal preparation, resubmission polishing, journal paper improvement, response-to-reviewers drafting, and deciding when additional data, experiments, theory, modeling, or author judgment is required before further revision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit academic peer review operations -- reviewer matching algorithms, conflict of interest detection, turnaround time optimization, review quality scoring, and editorial workflow management..

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Hostile self-review of recently written AI workflow code that then applies fixes (agents, tools, chat context, summarization, tokens, attachments). Use after generating AI systems code, or when asked to self-review and harden it. Not for PR peer review (code-review) or no-edit devil's-advocate attacks (adversarial-challenge). Prefer: adversarial-challenge → decide → this skill.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Devil's-advocate attack on AI workflow designs — threat model, assumption challenges, code critiques, and hypothetical redesigns with no file edits. Use for "attack this design", devil's advocate, or hostile challenge on agents/tools/summarization/tokens. Not for PR peer review (code-review) or self-review that applies fixes (ai-systems-review). Prefer: this skill → decide → ai-systems-review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Systematically review pull requests, feature implementations, and code changes to ensure quality, maintainability, security, and adherence to best practices. Use when reviewing code before merging, conducting peer reviews, performing self-reviews, auditing code quality, checking for security vulnerabilities, ensuring consistent coding standards, verifying test coverage, assessing performance implications, evaluating architectural decisions, or providing constructive feedback to improve team code quality.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when the user requests to review, analyze, critique, or summarize academic papers, research articles, preprints, or scientific publications. Supports comprehensive structured reviews covering methodology assessment, contribution evaluation, literature positioning, and constructive feedback generation. Trigger on queries involving paper URLs, uploaded PDFs, arXiv links, or requests like "review this paper", "analyze this research", "summarize this study", or "write a peer review".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when the user requests to review, analyze, critique, or summarize academic papers, research articles, preprints, or scientific publications. Supports comprehensive structured reviews covering methodology assessment, contribution evaluation, literature positioning, and constructive feedback generation. Trigger on queries involving paper URLs, uploaded PDFs, arXiv links, or requests like "review this paper", "analyze this research", "summarize this study", or "write a peer review".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when serving as a peer reviewer and deciding whether and how AI may assist, when a manuscript under review must never be pasted into an external tool, or when a confidentiality-preserving review and disclosure are needed.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Orchestrator for the full academic research pipeline: research -> write -> integrity check -> review -> revise -> re-review -> re-revise -> final integrity check -> finalize. Coordinates deep-research, academic-paper, and academic-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory, coverage-bounded integrity checks, two-stage peer review, and auditable quality-assurance artifacts. Triggers on: academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, complete paper workflow, 연구부터 논문까지, 연구 주제 설정부터 논문 완성까지, 논문 전체 워크플로, flujo de trabajo académico, investigación a artículo, flujo completo de artículo, pipeline de investigación completa, publicación de investigación, flujo de trabajo completo del artículo.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Prepares evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments. Supports authorized review of scientific manuscripts, protocols, preprints, or research proposals; reporting-guideline selection; claim–evidence checks; methods, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, figure/table, and citation critique; or revision-response planning.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。