| name | academic-paper-writing |
| description | Guides AI agents to write high-quality academic papers following top-tier conference standards.
Use this skill when:
- Writing or drafting academic papers for AI/systems conferences
- Designing paper structure, sections, or experimental methodology
- Creating figures, tables, or data visualizations for papers
- Performing literature review or managing citations
- Responding to reviewer comments or preparing rebuttal
- Any task involving academic writing workflow
Do NOT use for:
- Non-academic writing (blogs, marketing copy, documentation)
- Papers outside AI/systems domains without adaptation
- Simple formatting tasks that don't require domain expertise
|
Academic Paper Writing
Guide agents through the complete academic paper writing process, from initial draft to final submission.
Core Philosophy
Writing = Building Arguments, Not Recording Work
Papers must construct an irrefutable argument system, not simply document what was done. The goal: make reviewers conclude "this problem is important, this method is sound, these results are credible."
The Argument Loop
Observation → Insight → Design → Evidence
Every section must form a verifiable takeaway that closes this loop.
Reviewer Psychology
Four Axioms
- Default Distrust: Reviewers assume most papers are poor quality
- Limited Patience: Key information must appear early; conclusions go first
- Emotional Judgment: Visual presentation directly affects acceptance decisions
- Logical Closure: Arguments must be self-consistent; gaps invite rejection
Reviewers seek reasons to REJECT. Give them reasons to FIGHT for your paper.
Writing Workflow
Three-Phase Process
| Phase | Goal | Actions |
|---|
| Fast Output | Capture all ideas | Don't polish; write in Chinese then translate with LLM |
| Restructure | Rebuild logic | ~80% rewrite; refine figures; produce abstract and draft |
| Refine | Polish details | Adjust wording; add citations; fill pages; proofread |
Time Budget
| Work Type | Comfortable | Minimum |
|---|
| New work | 1 month | 2 weeks |
| Incremental | 3 weeks | 1 week |
| Resubmission | 1 week | 1 day |
Role Transition
Early phase: Engineer (deep in details)
Late phase: Researcher (above details)
Kill the Engineer in you; wake up the Researcher.
Paper Structure
Critical Sections (The Target)
These three sections define the problem and build consensus:
- Abstract: Mini Introduction; spend up to half on problem/motivation; show concrete numbers
- Introduction: Make reviewers want to read; structure: problem → gap → insight → contributions
- Background + Motivation: Not a tutorial; purposeful introduction; three-layer structure: Observation → Limitation → Opportunity
Supporting Sections
- Design: Explain trade-offs, not describe flow; modular presentation; abstract method, not implementation
- Implementation: Credibility boost, not workload display; keep brief
- Evaluation: Setup → Main results → Ablation → Supplementary; use concrete numbers in text
- Related Work: Categorize and contrast; highlight necessity of your approach
- Conclusion: Fill to full page; can include future work
Key Requirements
- Front two pages: include intuitive figures explaining the problem
- Design: minimum 3 points for top-tier; must cover all stated problems
- Evaluation: must close the loop—cover all design points and initial questions
Expression Standards
Paragraph Flow
Paragraphs should be like prayer beads—round, smooth bodies connected by a thread.
Each paragraph:承上 (connect up) → body → 启下 (connect down)
- Uniform length; no isolated short paragraphs
- Reader should flow through without thinking
Sentence Rules
| Problem | Fix |
|---|
| Clause trains | ... which ... which ... → .... It .... This ... |
| Head-heavy | Move long subject to It is common to see... |
| Colloquial | piece of cake → trivial to do |
Word Choice
| Avoid | Reason |
|---|
most, best | Extreme unless theoretically proven |
clever, genius | Subjective exaggeration |
| Rare terms | Unless domain-standard |
| Inconsistent naming | One term = one concept throughout |
Positive framing: fails to → is limited by → is designed for
Figure Standards
Information Density
- Compact layout; avoid "padding" accusations
- Unified color scheme across all figures
- Consider black-white printing; use textures
Dimensions
- Single column:
4inch × 100dpi = 400pt
- Double column: 7 inches wide
- Reserve 1-2 double-column figures for page filling
Data Visualization
- Global color palette; explicit color in all code
- Must show average/mean values
- Caption explains figure; self-contained understanding
- Matplotlib:
bbox_inches='tight', pad_inches=0
Experimental Rigor
Structure
Setup → Main Experiment → Ablation → Supplementary
Analysis Formula
Phenomenon → Cause → Design Connection → Implication
Requirements
- SOTA comparison required: No strong baseline = unverifiable paper
- Ablation required: Prove gains come from design
- Anomaly analysis: Surprising/negative results need deep explanation
- Numbers in text: Don't make readers hunt in figures
Analysis should be thorough enough that reviewers don't want to read it.
Submission Process
Pre-submission
- Verify template (font size errors are fatal)
- Remove copyright information
- Collect all ORCID IDs early
Rebuttal Workflow
List questions → Answer each → Merge similar → Assign responsibility
Camera-ready
- Fix reviewer-identified issues
- Add copyright, authorship, acknowledgments
- Watch for page count changes
Common Pitfalls
Content Errors
| Mistake | Correct Approach |
|---|
| Writing as tutorial | Purposeful intro; highlight connection to your work |
| Writing as engineering report | Build argument system |
| Implementation dumping | Abstract method, not details |
Experiment Errors
| Mistake | Correct Approach |
|---|
| Data dumping | Guide understanding with text |
| Unattributed gains | Prove source is your design |
| Missing baseline | SOTA comparison mandatory |
AI Tool Usage
- LLM translation shows detectable patterns
- Use LLM for translation + polish, but apply your own voice
- Writing experience beats observation
Self-Check List
Format
Content
Structure
Data
Consistency
Resources
Papers are labels you attach to yourself. What kind of person writes what kind of paper, and what kind of paper defines what kind of person.
