164 个 · 按相关度排序
Simulate peer review through five perspectives covering journal fit, methods, subject expertise, interdisciplinary implications, and counterarguments. Receive separate review reports, an editorial decision, and a revision roadmap, or check whether revisions address earlier comments.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
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, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Draft self-assessments, peer reviews, and feedback for managers using concrete examples of work and collaboration. Organizes achievements around context, actions, and results, matches your writing voice, and flags sections that need more evidence or detail.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
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.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Simulate a Nature-style reviewer assessment from the referee perspective rather than an author rebuttal. Use when the user wants a pre-submission review, reviewer report, peer-review style critique, novelty/significance/technical soundness assessment, reviewer-style manuscript evaluation, 审稿人视角评估, 预审稿意见, or Nature reviewer report. Return 3 reviewer reports plus a cross-review synthesis, grounded only in the local Nature reviewer source basis. Also trigger on general pre-submission review requests during academic writing even without the word "Nature", such as getting a mock peer review for any journal, critiquing a draft as a reviewer would, assessing novelty/rigor before submission, and Chinese phrasings like 审稿人视角、模拟审稿、预审、帮我审一下论文、投稿前自审、审稿意见模拟、找论文问题.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Review code for bugs, security vulnerabilities, API misuse, consistency issues, simplicity problems, or test coverage gaps and low-value tests by running internal reviews and a peer review in parallel and returning combined findings. Single-concern with a type argument, or full review with no argument. Use when the user asks to "review my code", "full code review", "review my changes", "check for bugs", "scan for bugs", "review correctness", "security audit", "find vulnerabilities", "review security", "check API usage", "verify against docs", "check for cross-file duplication", "review consistency", "check for code reuse", "review simplicity", "find untested code", "find redundant tests", or "review test coverage".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Ask external AI command-line tools to independently review a development phase plan. Collect feedback by reviewer in REVIEWS.md, then feed the results into GSD planning to support revisions.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Educator peer review management for Canvas LMS. Tracks completion rates, analyzes comment quality, flags problematic reviews, sends targeted reminders, and generates instructor-ready reports. Trigger phrases include "peer review status", "how are peer reviews going", "who hasn't reviewed", "review quality", or any peer review follow-up task.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Turn academic papers into structured reviews that explain findings, strengths, weaknesses, and research methods. Assess originality and supporting evidence, compare relevant literature, and provide specific improvement suggestions in a detailed review or brief summary.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Stress-test a paper with a focused rejection argument, then have a separate reviewer assess each objection against the current text. The report identifies unresolved weaknesses, their severity, and priority fixes for submission or rebuttal preparation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Support academic work from refining a research question to literature reviews, manuscript drafting, citation checks, and revision. Select workflows for the current stage, including study selection against eligibility criteria, peer review, and experiment planning.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Draft, review, or revise point-by-point peer review responses, revision cover letters, and marked manuscripts. The skill links claimed changes to manuscript locations, flags missing author input, and checks consistency across response letters and revised submission files.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Run an independent peer review via Claude. Use when the user asks to "peer review", "peer review my code", "peer review my plan", "get a second opinion", or "independent review".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Run an independent peer review via Codex. Use when the user asks to "peer review", "peer review my code", "peer review my plan", "get a second opinion", or "independent review".
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Simulate rigorous, fair peer review on a paper — in two modes. (A) Red-team YOUR OWN draft before submission to predict the reviews you'll get and get a fix list. (B) Review SOMEONE ELSE'S paper when you're an assigned reviewer or helping your advisor — produce a fair, venue-formatted, submission-ready review. Use whenever the user gives a paper (PDF, .tex, .md, arXiv link, or pasted text) and wants to predict reviews, find weaknesses before reviewers do, stress-test a submission, OR write a real review of another paper. Grounded in official NeurIPS/ICLR/ACL reviewer guidelines; every criticism pinned to a location, and checked against ACL's H1–H17 list of illegitimate critiques. 两种模式:审自己的稿(投稿前红队)/ 审别人的稿(当审稿人或帮导师),按会议官方标准评,绝不脑补、绝不发不正当批评。
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Self-review, audit, or verify CS/AI/ML paper drafts as a critical peer reviewer. Three-round review (evidence→argument→style) with Verification Status and debt tracking. Use when: reviewing a paper draft before submission, checking evidence compliance of claims, simulating peer reviewer feedback, verifying citation closure and evidence debts, performing cross-section consistency checks. Triggers on: 审修, self review, 自查, verification, revise, 修订, check draft, 审稿, evidence compliance, peer review, 论文审查, draft audit, 验证论文, 检查引用, cross-section review.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Prepare constructive review drafts for scientific manuscripts, protocols, preprints, and proposals. Organize checks of claims, evidence, methods, statistics, reproducibility, ethics, figures, and citations into specific comments that a responsible human reviewer can verify and revise.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Review Agent-Native Research Artifacts, structured research packages for agents, across six dimensions of research quality. Produce a JSON report with scores, strengths, severity-ranked findings, practical improvements, and an overall acceptance or rejection recommendation.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。
Comprehensive manuscript review with three modes: single-pass (default), --adversarial critic-fixer loop, and --peer [journal] simulated peer-review pipeline (editor + 2 dispositioned referees + editorial decision, calibrated to a target journal). R&R continuation via --peer --r2/--r3; hostile-editor stress test via --peer --stress; reviewer-disposition variance reporting via --peer --variance N. Auto-invokes /review-r + /audit-reproducibility on referenced scripts unless --no-cross-artifact.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when explaining or planning around AISTATS peer review, OpenReview review release, author-reviewer discussion, reviewer volunteer expectations, reviewer confidentiality, decision criteria, meta-review dynamics, the statistician-heavy reviewer pool, and PMLR proceedings outcomes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Produces a deep, honest peer-review of how someone uses Claude Code by statistically analyzing their local session data (~/.claude/usage-data/ and ~/.claude/projects/). Trigger whenever the user asks to review, analyze, audit, or critique their own Claude Code usage, workflow, habits, or skill level — including phrases like "analyze my cc usage", "review my cc sessions", "peer review my cc workflow", "deeper than /insights", or any ask for an honest audit of their AI workflow. Also covers portfolio/hiring-manager framings (e.g. "portfolio for Anthropic/OpenAI/xAI"), but ALWAYS ask the user in Step 0 which version to build (self / hr / both) before running — never silently produce an HR report, because that version goes to outsiders and needs explicit privacy setup. The HTML report is laid out ledger-first for SELF (opening band, output/team/leak/trend ledgers, then peer review, 9-dim scoring, try-this-week, case study, claim-indexed evidence). The HR variant is a recruiter version v1: identity card, earned badges (threshold-based, earned-only), allowlist-filtered output ledger, one case study, and a methodology & scope disclosure — no scores, no peer-review memo, no charts.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
7-agent paper review system on Hermes Agent. 6 modes (full/re-review/quick/methodology-focus/guided/calibration). 5-panel review with editorial decision, revision roadmap, and calibration metrics. Uses delegate_task for each reviewer. Triggers: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, check revisions, calibrate reviewer, 審稿, 同儕審查, 論文審查.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Three modes for CS-conference papers (CVPR/ICCV/ECCV vision, ACL/EMNLP/NAACL NLP, ICLR/NeurIPS/ICML/AAAI ML). DIRECT-EDIT mode (common): the user describes a change in Chinese or English and the manuscript (LaTeX or Markdown) is edited directly through a CS-venue writing toolkit with author sign-off (use for 改这段 / 把中文想法写成 latex / polish / de-AI / translate / compress a passage). REVIEW mode (occasional, pre-submission): harden the paper through an adversarial courtroom review engine (N holistic domain reviewers / contestability routing / two-sided trial / three-way verdict / clerk-converged multi-round loop) with consensus-gated, author-signed revisions (use for review / critique / 审稿 / 评审 / mock-review). AUTO mode (unattended, opt-in via /goal): run the review-revise loop toward a verifiable goal, applying safe fixes under a drift-bounded policy and queueing risky ones. Resolves all inputs at runtime, no hardcoded paths. Not a from-scratch drafter (use ml-paper-writing) and not an official-venue rebuttal.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。