pipeline
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy + statsmodels + linearmodels + pyfixest +…
Verify that every quantitative claim in the paper is traceable to an analysis output file, and that no important output was omitted. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to check that the paper and analysis are consistent before submission. Triggers include: "run
$ npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill quality-gate --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/quality-gateContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Verify that every quantitative claim in the paper is traceable to an analysis output file, and that no important output was omitted. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to check that the paper and analysis are consistent before submission. Triggers include: "run
name: quality-gate description: >- Verify that every quantitative claim in the paper is traceable to an analysis output file, and that no important output was omitted. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to check that the paper and analysis are consistent before submission. Triggers include: "run the quality gate", "check the paper matches the analysis", "verify consistency", "does the paper match my results", "check my numbers", "are my tables right", "quality check before submission", "verify my claims", "make sure everything is consistent", "double-check the paper against my output files", or any pre-submission integrity check between paper text and computed results. argument-hint: "[paper file path, or leave blank to auto-detect]" allowed-tools: ["Read", "Grep", "Glob", "Write", "Task", "AskUserQuestion"]
Cross-check every numerical claim in the paper against analysis output files. Reports only — never edits.
**Input:** `$ARGUMENTS` — path to the paper draft, or leave blank to auto-detect.
---
If `$ARGUMENTS` is provided, use that path. Otherwise glob for:
If multiple drafts found, use AskUserQuestion to let the user pick:
---
Read the full manuscript and extract every quantitative claim:
Record location (section, paragraph, line number if available) for each claim.
---
Glob for all output files:
Build an inventory with file paths and sizes.
---
Dispatch the `verifier` agent via Task to perform the heavy verification work. Pass it:
Task prompt: "You are the verifier agent. Paper draft: [path]. Bibliography: [bib path]. CLAIMS TO VERIFY: [paste the full claims list from Step 2] OUTPUT FILE INVENTORY: [paste the inventory from Step 3] Verify each claim against the output files. Then do a reverse check — find output files NOT referenced in the paper. Then check all citation keys against the bibliography. Follow the verifier agent instructions and return your full verification report."
After the verifier completes, collect its results:
---
Save to `quality_reports/quality_gate_[YYYY-MM-DD]_[paper-name].md`:
# Quality Gate Report: [Paper Name] **Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD] **Paper:** [file path] ## Verdict: PASS / CONDITIONAL PASS / FAIL PASS = all claims matched, no missing citations, no unexplained unreferenced outputs CONDITIONAL PASS = minor unverified claims or informational unreferenced outputs FAIL = unverified critical claims or missing citations --- ## Claim Verification | Claim | Location | Found in Output? | Source File | Status | |-------|----------|-----------------|-------------|--------| | β = 0.23 (SE = 0.04) | Section 4, para 2 | Yes | output/tables/main_regs.tex | MATCHED | | N = 4,521 | Table 2 note | Yes | output/tables/main_regs.tex | MATCHED | | 42% of firms | Intro, para 1 | No | — | UNVERIFIED | --- ## Unreferenced Outputs Files in output/ not referenced in the paper: | File | Size | Recommended Action | |------|------|-------------------| | output/tables/robustness_het.tex | 4.2 KB | Reference in Section 7 or explain exclusion | --- ## Missing Citations | Key | Used At | Status | |-----|---------|--------| | SmithJones2021 | Section 3, para 1 | NOT IN BIBLIOGRAPHY — CRITICAL | --- ## Summary - Claims verified: N / M total - Claims unverified: K (see table above) - Unreferenced outputs: J - Missing citations: L ## Recommended Actions (Priority Order) 1. [BLOCKING] ... 2. [RECOMMENDED] ...
---
📌 文档结构(2026-07-22 起): 本文件是中文默认入口 —— banner + badges + 信任面 + 9 阶段流水线速览 + 76 行合集总表。 每个合集的完整描述、按用途分组、精确数字、验证方法在 docs/CONTENT_ZH.md(扩展正文,总表行内的 → 直接跳转到对应锚点)。 English version: README-en.md · 中文扩展正文:docs/CONTENT_ZH.md · README-zh-CN.md 已弃用(重定向占位) 🌐 语言: English |
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy + statsmodels + linearmodels + pyfixest +…
Use when the user asks to run a full empirical / causal analysis in Python — by default in the style of an applied economics paper (AER / QJE / JPE / ReStud /…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy + statsmodels + linearmodels + pyfixest +…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Stata ecosystem — native Stata + reghdfe + ivreg2 + csdid + did_imputation +…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the modern tidyverse + econometrics R ecosystem — dplyr + tidyr + haven + fixest + sandwich + lmtest +…
Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want…