本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

draft-paper

Draft sections of the sewage-house-prices academic paper. Handles section drafting for the Overleaf LaTeX manuscript, notation protocol, anti-hedging, and humanizer pass. This skill should be used when asked to "draft the paper", "write up the results", "write the intro", or draft any section of the manuscript.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md7.3 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Draft Paper

Draft a section (or full draft) of the "Sewage in Our Waters" academic paper on the causal impact of sewage spills on house prices and rents in England.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — section name optionally followed by specific instructions or notes.


Project-Specific Context

Paper Structure

The manuscript lives in docs/overleaf/ with this structure:

  • _main.tex — Master document (KOMA-Script scrartcl, APA biblatex, libertinus font)
  • 01_introduction.tex — Introduction
  • 02_background_context.tex — UK sewage policy and institutional background
  • 03_motivating_evidence.tex — Descriptive evidence and stylised facts
  • 04_hydraulics_instrument.tex — Hydraulic capacity instrument
  • 05_research_question.tex — Identification strategy and empirical specification
  • 100_appendix_descriptives.tex — Appendix: descriptive statistics
  • 101_appendix_results.tex — Appendix: supplementary results
  • 102_appendix_dry_spills.tex — Appendix: dry spill analysis
  • 103_appendix_data.tex — Appendix: data documentation
  • glossary.tex — Glossary of terms
  • refs.bib — Bibliography (APA style via biblatex)

Generated Output

  • output/tables/*.tex — Regression tables (modelsummary → LaTeX with tabularray)
  • output/figures/ — Figures (maps, event studies, scatter plots)
  • book/ — Quarto website with exploratory analysis (.qmd files)

Econometric Approaches

The paper uses multiple identification strategies:

  1. Hedonic regressions — Cross-sectional: spill count/hours (continuous + bins) × prior/full period, with LSOA FE
  2. Repeat sales — Within-property variation (Palmquist 1982 approach)
  3. Long difference — 250m grid-level changes, weighted/unweighted × all/exposed grids
  4. News/media DiD — Google Trends and LexisNexis media coverage as treatment
  5. Upstream/downstream — Directional spillover via river network topology
  6. Dry spills — Spills occurring without rainfall as identification variation

Key Variables and Notation

  • Outcome: log(price) for sales, log(rent) for rentals
  • Treatment: spill_count, spill_hrs, spill_count_daily_avg, spill_hrs_daily_avg
  • Geography: n_spill_sites within radius, min_dist / mean_dist to nearest site
  • Radii: 250m, 500m, 1000m, 2000m, 5000m, 10000m
  • Fixed effects: LSOA (lsoa), MSOA (msoa), year-quarter
  • Standard errors: heteroskedasticity-robust (vcov = "hetero") via fixest::feols()

LaTeX Conventions

  • Citations: \textcite{} for textual, \parencite{} for parenthetical (APA biblatex)
  • Tables: tabularray format with booktabs, [H] float placement
  • Equations: numbered with \label{eq:...}

Workflow

Step 1: Context Gathering

Before drafting:

  1. Read the existing section file in docs/overleaf/ (if it exists)
  2. Read _main.tex to understand document structure and preamble
  3. Scan output/tables/ for available regression output
  4. Scan output/figures/ for available figures
  5. Check refs.bib for available citations
  6. Read relevant .qmd files in book/ for analysis context and results interpretation
  7. Read relevant analysis scripts in scripts/R/09_analysis/ for methodology details

Step 2: Section Routing

Based on $ARGUMENTS:

  • intro: Draft 01_introduction.tex
  • background: Draft 02_background_context.tex
  • motivating-evidence: Draft 03_motivating_evidence.tex
  • instrument: Draft 04_hydraulics_instrument.tex
  • research-question: Draft 05_research_question.tex
  • results: Draft results section(s) from regression output
  • conclusion: Draft conclusion
  • abstract: Draft abstract (requires other sections to exist)
  • appendix: Draft or extend appendix sections
  • full: Draft all sections in sequence, pausing between for user feedback
  • No argument: Ask which section to draft

Step 3: Drafting Standards

Introduction (~1,000-1,500 words)

  • Hook with UK sewage crisis context → research question → methodology overview → key findings → contribution → road map
  • Contribution paragraph names specific papers being advanced (environmental disamenity capitalisation, hedonic pricing literature)
  • Effect sizes with magnitudes and units (percentage impact on house prices per additional spill)

Background & Context (~800-1,200 words)

  • UK privatised water industry structure
  • EDM monitoring requirements and data availability (2021+)
  • Scale of the sewage spill problem
  • Policy and regulatory responses

Empirical Strategy (~800-1,200 words)

  • Identification assumption stated formally
  • Estimating equation displayed and numbered
  • Each approach (hedonic, repeat sales, long diff) with clear specification
  • Threats to identification addressed (sorting, omitted variables, measurement error)

Results (~800-1,500 words per approach)

  • Main specification with economic interpretation
  • Effect sizes in meaningful terms (£ impact, percentage change)
  • Robustness across radii, time periods, and specifications
  • Heterogeneity results

Conclusion (~500-700 words)

  • Restate headline effect sizes
  • Policy implications for water regulation
  • Limitations and future work (rental market, long-run effects)

Step 4: Humanizer Pass

Apply automatically as final pass:

  • Strip AI writing patterns (see /humanizer skill for full 24-pattern checklist)
  • Preserve formal academic structure where genuinely needed
  • Maintain citation density and technical vocabulary

Step 5: Quality Self-Check

Before presenting the draft:

  • Every displayed equation is numbered (\label{eq:...})
  • All \textcite{} / \parencite{} keys exist in refs.bib
  • Effect sizes stated with units and magnitudes
  • No banned hedging phrases ("interestingly", "it is worth noting")
  • Notation consistent with project conventions (LSOA, MSOA, radius distances)
  • All referenced tables/figures actually exist in output/
  • LaTeX compiles cleanly with the KOMA-Script setup

Step 6: Present to User

Present each section for feedback. Flag:

  • TBD: Where empirical results are needed but not yet available
  • VERIFY: Citations that need user confirmation
  • PLACEHOLDER: Effect sizes awaiting final estimates

Principles

  • This is the authors' paper (Balboni & Dhingra), not Claude's. Match their voice and style from existing sections.
  • Never fabricate results. Use TBD placeholders. Cross-check numbers against output/tables/.
  • Citations must be verifiable. Only cite papers confirmed in refs.bib or the literature review in docs/lit_review/.
  • Humanizer is automatic. Every draft gets de-AI-ified before presentation.
  • Match existing conventions. Read existing .tex files first to match style, formatting, and level of formality.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

a1

無料

VS-Enhanced Research Question Refiner - Prevents Mode Collapse and derives differentiated research questions Enhanced VS 3-Phase process: Modal question avoidance, alternatives presentation, differentiated RQ recommendation Use when: refining research ideas, formulating research questions, clarifying scope Triggers: research question, 연구 질문, PICO, SPIDER, research idea

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

a2

無料

VS-Enhanced Theoretical Framework Architect with Critique & Visualization Full VS 5-Phase process: Modal theory avoidance, Long-tail exploration, differentiated framework presentation Absorbed A3 (Devil's Advocate) critique and A6 (Conceptual Framework Visualizer) capabilities Use when: building theoretical foundations, designing conceptual models, deriving hypotheses, critiquing frameworks, visualizing models Triggers: theoretical framework, 이론적 프레임워크, conceptual model, 개념적 모형, hypothesis derivation, critique, devil's advocate, 반론, visualization, diagram

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

a5

無料

Agent A5 - Paradigm & Worldview Advisor - Philosophical foundations for research design. Covers ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology alignment. Use when: establishing philosophical foundations, justifying methodological choices, writing positionality statements Triggers: paradigm, 패러다임, ontology, epistemology, worldview, 세계관, philosophical foundations, 철학적 기초

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Academic paper writing skill with 12-agent pipeline. v2.5: Style Calibration (learn author's writing voice from past papers) + Writing Quality Check (writing quality checklist for natural prose). Supports IMRaD, literature review, theoretical, case study, policy brief, and conference paper structures. APA 7.0 (default), Chicago, MLA, IEEE, Vancouver citation formats. Bilingual abstracts (zh-TW + EN). Multi-format output (LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, Markdown). Triggers on: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, guide my paper, parse reviews, revision roadmap, 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 檢查引用, 引導我寫論文, 帶我規劃論文, 逐章規劃, 論文架構, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖.

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial 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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する