Workflow 3: Full paper writing pipeline that goes from a narrative report to a polished, submission-ready PDF. Use when user says "写论文全流程", "write paper pipeline", "从报告到PDF", "paper writing", or wants the complete paper generation workflow.

Workflow 3: Paper Writing Pipeline Orchestrate a complete paper writing workflow for: $ARGUMENTS Overview This skill chains five sub skills into a single automated pipeline: Each phase builds on the previous one's output. The final deliverable is a polished, reviewed paper/ directory with LaTeX source and compiled PDF. In this hybrid pack, the pipeline itself is unchanged, but paper plan and paper write use Orchestra adapted shared references for stronger story framing and prose guidance. Constants VENUE = ICLR — Target venue. Options: ICLR , NeurIPS , ICML , CVPR , ACL , AAAI , ACM , IEEE JOURNAL (IEEE Transactions / Letters), IEEE CONF (IEEE conferences). Affects style file, page limit, citation format. MAX IMPROVEMENT ROUNDS = 2 — Number of review→fix→recompile rounds in the improvement loop. REVIEWER MODEL = gpt 6 astra — Model used via Codex MCP for plan review, figure review, writing review, and improvement loop. AUTO PROCEED = true — Auto continue between phases. Set false to pause and wait for user approval after each phase. HUMAN CHECKPOINT = false — When true , the improvement loop (Phase 5) pauses after each round's review to let you see the score and provide custom modification instructions. When false (default), the loop runs fully autonomously. Passed through to /auto paper improvement loop . ILLUSTRATION = figurespec — Architecture/illustration generator for Phase 2b: figurespec (default, deterministic JSON→SVG via /figure spec , best for architecture/workflow/topology), gemini (AI generated via /paper illustration , best for qualitative method illustrations; needs GEMINI API KEY ), codex image2 (AI generated via /paper illustration image2 through the local Codex native image bridge — no external API key, uses your ChatGPT Plus/Pro quota; experimental), mermaid (Mermaid syntax via /mermaid diagram , free, best for flowcharts), or false (skip Phase 2b, manual only). Override inline: /paper writing "NARRATIVE REPORT.md" — venue: NeurIPS, illustration: gemini, human checkpoint: true IEEE example: /paper writing "NARRATIVE REPORT.md" — venue: IEEE JOURNAL Inputs This pipeline accepts one of: 1. NARRATIVE REPORT.md (best) — structured research narrative with claims, experiments, results, figures 2. Research direction + experiment results — the skill will help draft the narrative first 3. Existing PAPER PLAN.md — skip Phase 1, start from Phase 1.5 (the contract negotiation still runs; only resuming a genuine pre 1.5 legacy run may skip it, and then Phase 6.0's row 0 records "no contract") The more detailed the input (especially figure descriptions and quantitative results), the better the output. Optional: Style reference ( — style ref: <source , opt in) Lets the user steer structural style (section ordering, theorem density, sentence cadence, figure density, bibliography style) of the generated paper toward a reference paper they admire. Default OFF — when the user does not pass — style ref , do nothing differently from before. When — style ref: <source is in $ARGUMENTS , run the helper FIRST, before Phase 1 (paper plan): Then forward — style ref: <source only to the writer side sub skills: /paper plan (Phase 1) — outline structure /paper write (Phase 3) — section by section prose /paper illustration (Phase 2b) — figure structural matching, optional Sources accepted: local TeX dir / file, local PDF, arXiv id, http(s) URL. Overleaf URLs/IDs are rejected — clone via /overleaf sync setup <id first and pass the local clone path. Strict rules (full contract in tools/extract paper style.py docstring): Use style profile.md as structural guidance only. Match section count tendency, theorem density, caption length distribution, sentence cadence, math display ratio, citation style. Never copy prose, claims, examples, or terminology from anything reachable through the cache. Never pass — style ref (or the cache contents) to reviewer / auditor sub skills — Phase 4.5 ( /proof checker ), Phase 4.7 / 5.5 ( /paper claim audit ), Phase 5 ( /auto paper improvement loop reviewer), Phase 5.8 ( /citation audit ) MUST run on the artifact alone. Cross model review independence ( ../shared references/reviewer independence.md ). Pipeline Phase 0: Assurance Setup Resolve the active assurance level and persist it so Phase 6's external verifier reads the same value. Run once at pipeline start, before Phase 1. Resolution order (first match wins): 1. Explicit — assurance: draft submission in $ARGUMENTS 2. Derived from — effort: lite / balanced → draft (default, zero change from current behavior ) max / beast → submission 3. Default: draft Action: What each level does downstream: draft — Existing behavior. Audits run only when their content detector matches (Phase 4.5 / 4.7 / 5.5 / 5.8). Missing artifacts are non blocking. Silent skip allowed. submission — The four mandatory audits (proof checker, paper claim audit, citation audit, kill argument) are treated as load bearing gates. Each sub audit must emit its JSON artifact (PASS / WARN / FAIL / NOT APPLICABLE / BLOCKED / ERROR) — never silent skip. Phase 6 runs verify paper audits.sh (canonical name; resolved per [ shared references/integration contract.md ](../shared references/integration contract.md) §2); a non zero exit blocks the Final Report. Escape hatch: a user wanting the old "beast = depth only, no audit gate" can pass — effort: beast, assurance: draft explicitly. Legal but discouraged for actual submissions. See shared references/assurance contract.md for the full contract. Announce the resolved level in line before Phase 1: Phase 1: Paper Plan Invoke /paper plan to create the structural outline: If — style ref: <source was passed in $ARGUMENTS and the helper succeeded above, append — style ref: <source to the invocation: /paper plan "<topic — style ref: <source " . (Writer side phase — forwarding is allowed; reviewer/auditor phases below must not see the style ref.) What this does: Parse NARRATIVE REPORT.md for claims, evidence, and figure descriptions Build a Claims Evidence Matrix — every claim maps to evidence, every experiment supports a claim Design section structure (5 8 sections depending on paper type) Plan figure/table placement with data sources Scaffold citation structure GPT 6 Astra reviews the plan for completeness Output: PAPER PLAN.md with section plan, figure plan, citation scaffolding. Checkpoint: Present the plan summary to the user. User approves (or AUTO PROCEED=true) → proceed to Phase 1.5. User requests changes → adjust plan and re present. Phase 1.5: Negotiated Acceptance Contract (before any writing) The plan says what the paper will contain; the CONTRACT says what "done" means — a checklist of testable assertions, negotiated ADVERSARIALLY before the first section is written, and graded at the end. (The plan is the boundary; the contract is what gets graded.) 1. Executor proposes. From PAPER PLAN.md + NARRATIVE REPORT.md , draft PAPER ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT.md : 10–20 testable assertions covering — every headline claim has a named evidence source (file/table); every number in the abstract traces to a results file; scope qualifiers the title /abstract must carry; figures that must exist and what each must show; section level completeness (e.g. "limitations names ≥2 real limitations, not hedges"); venue constraints (page limit, anonymization). Each assertion must be CHECKABLE by reading the final PDF + results files — no vibes ("writing is clear" is not an assertion; "every acronym is defined at first use" is). Fewer than ~10 assertions and the gate rubber stamps; beyond ~20 the negotiation stalls on trivia. 2. Reviewer pushes back (fresh thread — the negotiation is adversarial): A reply with a missing or malformed CONTRACT ACCEPTED: line is treated as no ; request a corrected verdict via codex reply — that correction exchange does not consume a negotiation round. 3. Iterate. On no , revise the contract per the demands and resubmit via mcp codex codex reply (same thread — the negotiation is one conversation). Max 3 rounds. 4. Fallback — never stall the pipeline. If round 3 still ends in no : record the unresolved demands verbatim in a " Disputed" section of the contract and mark it status: contested . A contested contract is precisely the "insert a human when the CONTRACT is wrong" trigger, so it OVERRIDES AUTO PROCEED for this one decision: pause and present the dispute for a human tie break. If no human responds (unattended/overnight run), proceed — but a contested contract caps the outcome: Phase 6.0 gates on the UNDISPUTED assertions and the Final Report must set Submission ready: no with the dispute reproduced verbatim; the tie break happens when the human returns. Output: PAPER ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT.md ( status: accepted contested , round count, reviewer thread id). The contract is FROZEN once accepted — Phases 2–5 implement against it; they do not edit it. If writing reveals an assertion is genuinely wrong (not merely inconvenient), that is a contract question: surface it at a checkpoint, don't silently rewrite. Boundary: /paper claim audit (Phases 4.7, 5.5) stays zero context — the contract is a WRITER side gate and is never passed to the claim auditor (its independence is the point; two different nets). Phase 2: Figure Generation If — style ref: <source was passed in $ARGUMENTS and the helper succeeded above, append — style ref: <source to every writer side sub skill invocation in this pipeline (Phases 1, 2b, 3, 5). Do not append it to reviewer/auditor invocations (Phases 4.5, 4.7, 5.5, 5.8). Invoke /paper figure to generate data driven plots and tables: What this does: Read figure plan from PAPER PLAN.md Generate matplotlib/seaborn plots from JSON/CSV data Generate LaTeX comparison tables Create figures/latex includes.tex for easy insertion GPT 6 Astra reviews figure quality and captions Output: figures/ directory with PDFs, generation scripts, and LaTeX snippets. Scope: paper figure covers data plots and comparison tables. Architecture diagrams, pipeline figures, and method illustrations are handled in Phase 2b below. Phase 2b: Architecture & Illustration Generation Skip this step entirely if illustration: false . If the paper plan includes architecture diagrams, pipeline figures, audit cascades, or method illustrations, invoke the appropriate generator based on the illustration parameter: When illustration: figurespec (default) — invoke /figure spec : Deterministic JSON → SVG vector rendering (editable, reproducible) Best for: system architecture, workflow pipelines, audit cascades, layered topology Output: figures/ .svg + figures/ .pdf (via rsvg convert) + figures/specs/ .json No external API, runs fully local If — style ref: <source was passed and the helper succeeded above, append — style ref: <source to the invocation below as well. When illustration: gemini — invoke /paper illustration : Claude plans → Gemini optimizes → Nano Banana Pro renders → Claude reviews (score ≥ 9) Best for: qualitative method illustrations, natural style diagrams, result grids Output: figures/ai generated/ .png Requires GEMINI API KEY environment variable When illustration: mermaid — invoke /mermaid diagram : Generates Mermaid syntax diagrams (flowchart, sequence, class, state, etc.) Best for: lightweight flowcharts, state machines, simple sequence diagrams Output: figures/ .mmd + figures/ .png Free, no API key needed When illustration: codex image2 — invoke /

paper-writing