| name | writing-research-papers |
| description | Structures and writes a public research page — canonical sections (abstract through limitations), storytelling that carries findings, chart hygiene, referencing for credibility, repurposing for different audiences. Use when turning finished analysis into a paper, portfolio page, or public write-up. |
Writing research papers
A paper is your work, retold so a stranger can trust it in ten minutes. Structure does half the
job; honest storytelling does the rest.
The canonical sections (in this order)
- Title + Abstract — 5 sentences: question → data → method → headline result → what it's
for. Write it LAST, place it FIRST. Most readers read only this; make it complete.
- Introduction / Problem — the decision this supports, and why it matters. One real
scenario beats three abstract paragraphs.
- Data — source, size, time windows, what you excluded and why. Public-safe: no private
names, addresses, or raw queries, ever.
- Methodology — assumptions, features, how the label is defined, the baseline, the
validation design (grouped/time split), and the leakage checks you ran. This section is what
separates a paper from a blog post.
- Results — model vs baseline, same split, base rate visible. Tables for precision,
charts for shape.
- Limitations & honest framing — what this work cannot claim. Writing this section
yourself, before a reader does, is what earns trust.
- Ranked recommendations — the "so what": what a person should do first, with reasons.
- Reproducibility — links to the notebooks and repo; seeds; how to rerun.
- Acknowledgments & data credit — name and link your data source. Standard practice, and
it tells readers the data is real.
Storytelling that isn't spin
- One thread: question → tension ("the obvious rule fails because…") → resolution (your result).
- Concrete before abstract: open sections with the example, then the principle.
- Every chart earns its place: one message per chart, axis labels a stranger understands, the
takeaway written UNDER the chart in one sentence. Three great charts beat ten fillers.
- Numbers in context: "24% → 68% (≈3×)" — always the comparison, never a lone number.
Reading design (people skim)
Short paragraphs (2-4 sentences). Real headings. A reader scrolling fast should learn your
finding from headings + chart captions alone. Mobile-check it — half your readers are on phones.
Repurpose the same work
- Social post: one finding + one chart + one method sentence + link.
- Employer 3-sentencer: what I built · on what data (size! realness!) · what it showed.
- SEO framing: the page title should be the QUESTION people search, not your project name.
How to verify
- The 10-minute test: someone reads only abstract + charts + limitations. Can they state your
finding and its limits correctly? Ask your assistant to role-play exactly that reader.
- Every claim on the page passes the claim ladder (see writing-honest-claims skill).
- All 9 sections present; the data credit links; the notebooks link resolves.
