ablation-planner
Use when main results pass result-to-claim (claim_supported=yes or partial) and ablation studies are needed for paper submission.
Zero-context verification that every bibliographic entry in the paper is real, correctly attributed, and used in a context the cited paper actually supports — catching hallucinated authors, wrong years, fabricated venues, version mismatches, and wrong-context citations. Use when
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill citation-audit -a windsurf -y
name: citation-audit description: "Zero-context verification that every bibliographic entry in the paper is real, correctly attributed, and used in a context the cited paper actually supports — catching hallucinated authors, wrong years, fabricated venues, version mismatches, and wrong-context citations. Use when user says \"审查引用\", \"check citations\", \"citation audit\", \"verify references\", \"引用核对\", or before submission to ensure bibliography integrity." argument-hint: "[paper-directory-or-bib-file] [--uncited] [— soft-only]" allowed-tools: Bash(*), Read, Grep, Glob, Edit, Write, mcp__codex__codex, WebSearch, WebFetch, mcp__antigravity__antigravity, mcp__antigravity__antigravity-reply, mcp__grok__grok, mcp__grok__grok-reply, mcp__claude-review__review, mcp__claude-review__review_reply, mcp__claude-review__review_start, mcp__claude-review__review_reply_start, mcp__claude-review__review_status
> **Before each reviewer slot**, follow [Selectable Reviewers](../shared-references/reviewer-backends.md): > resolve invocation → `.aris/reviewer.json` → Claude Code default (Codex MCP) > with `reviewer_route.py` through the canonical helper resolver, preserving this > slot's tier, fresh contexts, source/image inputs and deterministic gates. > Codex examples/pins below apply only to `backend=codex`; other routes use their > own first-call/reply contract. Save the route and actual returned identity; > unavailable selections are `REVIEW_UNAVAILABLE`. Classify acceptance from actual > families/completion/scope. Forward invocation reviewer/model/effort overrides > to reviewer-bearing children. Generation workers are unchanged.
> 🔒 **Do not wrap this skill in `/loop`, `/schedule`, or `CronCreate`.** It is > verdict-bearing — it judges bibliographic correctness. Re-running that verdict > on a timer adds no new signal (it changes only when the *bibliography* > changes). Schedule the *external wait that precedes it* — bibliography > finalized → then audit **once**. See > [`shared-references/external-cadence.md`](../shared-references/external-cadence.md).
Verify every `\cite{...}` in a paper against three independent layers:
1. **Existence** — the cited paper actually exists at the claimed arXiv ID / DOI / venue. 2. **Metadata correctness** — author names, year, venue, and title match canonical sources (DBLP, arXiv, ACL Anthology, Nature, OpenReview, etc.). 3. **Context appropriateness** — the cited paper actually supports the claim it is being used to support in the manuscript.
This skill is the fourth layer of \aris{}'s evidence-and-claim assurance, complementing `experiment-audit` (code), `result-to-claim` (science verdict), and `paper-claim-audit` (numerical claims). Together they form a bottom-up integrity stack from raw evaluation code to manuscript bibliography.
**Run before submission.** The right gating point is:
**Do not** run this on a half-written draft — most of the work is in cross-checking each `\cite` against context, which is wasted on placeholder text.
The dangerous citation problems are **not** wildly fake citations — those are easy to spot. The dangerous ones are:
Locate:
If multiple bib files exist, audit each separately.
For each `\cite{key1,key2,...}` invocation in the paper:
Output a flat list of `(key, file, line, surroundin
· · · · · · · · 💬 Join Community · 🌱 ARIS is a methodology, not a platform. What matters is the research workflow — take it wherever you go.
Use when main results pass result-to-claim (claim_supported=yes or partial) and ablation studies are needed for paper submission.
Quick single-paper lookup via AlphaXiv LLM-optimized summaries with tiered source fallback. Use when user says "explain this…
Analyze ML experiment results, compute statistics, generate comparison tables and insights. Use when user says "analyze results",…
Search, download, and summarize academic papers from arXiv. Use when user says "search arxiv", "download paper", "fetch arxiv",…
Autonomously improve a generated paper via GPT-6-Astra xhigh review → implement fixes → recompile, for 2 rounds. Use when user…
Autonomous research review loop using any OpenAI-compatible LLM API. Configure via llm-chat MCP server or environment variables.…
Direct browser control via CDP for web interaction: automation, scraping, testing, screenshots, and site/app work. Also covers…
Browser automation CLI for AI agents. Use when the user needs to interact with websites, including navigating pages, filling…