跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

Traversing Citation Networks

Find related research by following a paper's references and the later papers that cite it through Semantic Scholar. Filters prioritize relevant candidates, avoid duplicate reviews, and record citation relationships for a focused literature search.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Smart backward and forward citation following via Semantic Scholar, with relevance filtering and deduplication

实测评分 未实测

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Finding related studies from a relevant paper
  • Checking which papers cite a study
  • Tracing earlier work through references
  • Recording citation links without duplicate reviews

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md9.8 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

<!-- ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗ ║ 本文件为开源 Skill 原始文档,收录仅供学习与研究参考 ║ ║ CoPaper.AI 收集整理 | https://copaper.ai ║ ╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝ 来源仓库: https://github.com/kthorn/research-superpower 项目名称: research-superpower 开源协议: MIT License 收录日期: 2026-04-02 声明: 本文件版权归原作者所有。此处收录旨在为社会科学实证研究者 提供 AI Agent Skills 的集中参考。如有侵权,请联系删除。 -->

Traversing Citation Networks

Overview

Intelligently follow citations backward (references) and forward (citing papers) using Semantic Scholar API.

Core principle: Only follow citations relevant to user's query. Avoid exponential explosion by filtering before traversing.

When to Use

Use this skill when:

  • Found a highly relevant paper (score ≥ 7)
  • Need to find related work
  • User asks "what papers cite this?"
  • Building comprehensive understanding of a topic

When NOT to use:

  • Paper scored < 7 (not relevant enough to follow)
  • Already at 50 papers (check with user first)
  • Citations look off-topic from abstract

Citation Traversal Strategy

1. Get Paper ID from Semantic Scholar

Lookup by DOI:

curl "https://api.semanticscholar.org/graph/v1/paper/DOI:10.1234/example.2023?fields=paperId,title,year"

Response:

{
  "paperId": "abc123def456",
  "title": "Paper Title",
  "year": 2023
}

Save paperId - needed for citations/references queries

2. Backward Traversal (References)

Get references from paper:

curl "https://api.semanticscholar.org/graph/v1/paper/abc123def456/references?fields=contexts,intents,title,year,abstract,externalIds&limit=100"

Response format:

{
  "data": [
    {
      "citedPaper": {
        "paperId": "xyz789",
        "title": "Referenced Paper Title",
        "year": 2020,
        "abstract": "...",
        "externalIds": {
          "DOI": "10.5678/referenced.2020",
          "PubMed": "87654321"
        }
      },
      "contexts": [
        "...as described in previous work [15]...",
        "...we used the method from [15] to..."
      ],
      "intents": ["methodology", "background"]
    }
  ]
}

Filter for relevance:

For each reference, check:

  1. Context keywords: Do citation contexts mention user's query terms?
    • Example: If user asks about "IC50 values", look for contexts mentioning "IC50", "activity", "potency"
  2. Title match: Does title contain relevant keywords?
  3. Intent: Is intent "methodology" or "result" (more relevant) vs "background" (less relevant)?

Scoring:

  • Context keywords match: +3 points
  • Title keywords match: +2 points
  • Intent is methodology/result: +2 points
  • Recent (< 5 years old): +1 point

Only add to queue if score ≥ 5

3. Forward Traversal (Citations)

Get papers citing this one:

curl "https://api.semanticscholar.org/graph/v1/paper/abc123def456/citations?fields=title,year,abstract,externalIds&limit=100"

Response format:

{
  "data": [
    {
      "citingPaper": {
        "paperId": "def456ghi",
        "title": "Newer Paper Citing This",
        "year": 2024,
        "abstract": "We extended the work of [original paper]...",
        "externalIds": {
          "DOI": "10.9012/citing.2024"
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}

Filter for relevance:

For each citing paper:

  1. Title match: Keywords present in title?
  2. Abstract match: User's query terms in abstract?
  3. Recency: Newer papers often build on findings (prioritize < 2 years)
  4. Citation count: If Semantic Scholar provides, highly cited papers more likely relevant

Scoring:

  • Title keywords match: +3 points
  • Abstract keywords match: +2 points
  • Recent (< 2 years): +2 points
  • Moderate recency (2-5 years): +1 point

Only add to queue if score ≥ 5

4. Deduplication

Before adding to queue:

Check papers-reviewed.json:

doi = paper["externalIds"].get("DOI")
if doi in papers_reviewed:
    skip  # Already processed
else:
    add to queue

CRITICAL: After evaluating any paper from citation traversal, add it to papers-reviewed.json regardless of score. This prevents re-processing the same paper from multiple sources.

Track citation relationship in citations/citation-graph.json:

{
  "10.1234/example.2023": {
    "references": ["10.5678/ref1.2020", "10.5678/ref2.2021"],
    "cited_by": ["10.9012/cite1.2024", "10.9012/cite2.2024"]
  }
}

CRITICAL: Use ONLY citation-graph.json for citation tracking. Do NOT create custom files like forward_citation_pmids.txt or citation_analysis.md. All findings go in SUMMARY.md.

5. Process Queue

Add relevant citations to processing queue:

{
  "doi": "10.5678/referenced.2020",
  "title": "Referenced Paper",
  "relevance_score": 7,
  "source": "backward_from:10.1234/example.2023",
  "context": "Method citation - describes IC50 measurement protocol"
}

Then:

  • Evaluate using evaluating-paper-relevance skill
  • If relevant, extract data and potentially traverse its citations too

Smart Traversal Limits

To avoid explosion:

  • Only traverse papers scoring ≥ 7 in initial evaluation
  • Only follow citations scoring ≥ 5 in relevance filtering
  • Limit traversal depth to 2 levels (original → references → references of references)
  • Check with user after every 50 papers total

Breadth-first strategy:

  1. Get all references + citations for current paper
  2. Filter and score them
  3. Add high-scoring ones to queue
  4. Process next paper in queue
  5. Repeat until queue empty or hit limit

Progress Reporting

Report as you traverse:

🔗 Analyzing citations for: "Original Paper Title"
   → Found 45 references, 12 look relevant
   → Found 23 citing papers, 8 look relevant
   → Adding 20 papers to queue

📄 [51/127] Following reference: "Method for measuring IC50"
   Source: Referenced by original paper in Methods section
   Abstract score: 7 → Fetching full text...

API Rate Limiting

Semantic Scholar limits:

  • Free tier: 100 requests per 5 minutes
  • With API key: 1000 requests per 5 minutes

Be efficient:

  • Request multiple fields in one call (?fields=title,abstract,externalIds,year)
  • Use limit=100 to get more results per request
  • Cache responses - don't re-fetch same paper

If rate limited:

  • Wait 5 minutes
  • Report to user: "⏸️ Rate limited by Semantic Scholar API. Waiting 5 minutes..."
  • Consider getting API key for higher limits

Integration with Other Skills

After traversing citations:

  1. Queue now has N new papers to evaluate
  2. For each, use evaluating-paper-relevance skill
  3. If relevant, extract to SUMMARY.md
  4. If highly relevant (≥9), traverse its citations too
  5. Update citation-graph.json to track relationships

Quick Reference

TaskAPI Endpoint
Get paper by DOIGET /graph/v1/paper/DOI:{doi}?fields=paperId,title
Get referencesGET /graph/v1/paper/{paperId}/references?fields=contexts,title,abstract,externalIds
Get citationsGET /graph/v1/paper/{paperId}/citations?fields=title,abstract,externalIds
Check if processedLook up DOI in papers-reviewed.json
Filter relevanceScore based on context/title/intent/recency

Relevance Filtering Checklist

Before adding citation to queue:

  • Check if already in papers-reviewed.json (skip if yes)
  • Score based on context/title keywords (need ≥ 5)
  • Verify external ID (DOI or PMID) exists
  • Add source tracking ("backward_from:DOI" or "forward_from:DOI")
  • Add to queue with metadata

Common Mistakes

Not tracking all evaluated papers: Only adding relevant papers to papers-reviewed.json → Add EVERY paper after evaluation to prevent re-review Creating custom analysis files: Making forward_citation_pmids.txt, CITATION_ANALYSIS.md, etc. → Use ONLY citation-graph.json and SUMMARY.md Following all citations: Exponential explosion → Filter before adding to queue Ignoring context: Citation might be tangential → Read context strings Not deduplicating: Re-process same papers → Always check papers-reviewed.json before and after evaluation Too deep: Following 5+ levels → Limit to 2 levels, check with user Missing forward citations: Only checking references → Use both backward and forward No rate limiting awareness: API blocks you → Add delays, handle 429 errors

Example Workflow

1. User asks: "Find selectivity data for BTK inhibitors"
2. Search finds Paper A (score: 9, has great IC50 data)
3. Traverse citations for Paper A:
   - References: 45 total, 12 relevant (mention "selectivity", "IC50")
   - Citations: 23 total, 8 relevant (newer papers on BTK)
4. Add 20 papers to queue
5. Evaluate first queued paper (score: 8)
6. Extract data, traverse its citations (add 5 more)
7. Continue until queue empty or user says stop

Next Steps

After traversing citations:

  • Process queued papers with evaluating-paper-relevance
  • Update SUMMARY.md with new findings
  • Check if reached checkpoint (50 papers or 5 minutes)
  • If checkpoint: ask user to continue or stop

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

a1

免费

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47482026年10月20日 更新

a2

免费

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47482026年10月20日 更新

a5

免费

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • 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-Skills47482026年10月20日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47482026年10月20日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • 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-Skills47482026年10月20日 更新

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.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills47482026年10月20日 更新

查看 brycewang-stanford 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题