| name | research-gap |
| description | Identify research gaps and open questions from the literature in a workspace. Combines auditable search, citation analysis, and cross-paper comparison. Use when the user wants to find unexplored areas, formulate research questions, or assess where the field is heading. |
Research Gap Identification
Systematically discover research gaps and open questions from the literature in a workspace.
Prerequisites
The user must specify a workspace (--ws NAME) containing a sufficient number of papers (10+ recommended).
Report language is specified by the user (English or Chinese).
Execution Logic
1. Global Scan
autor ws show <name>
autor ws search <name> "<broad theme>"
Perform an L2 scan (title + abstract) on workspace papers to build a field map.
2. Multi-Dimensional Analysis
Dimension 1: Theme Coverage
autor ws search <name> "<theme keywords>"
autor research "<theme or gap question>" --run-dir workspace/<name>/runs/<case>
Are workspace papers concentrated in a few topics? Which related topics lack coverage?
Dimension 2: Temporal Trends
Tally workspace papers by year to identify:
- Directions with rapidly growing paper counts in recent years (hot topics)
- Directions where publication rates are declining (possibly matured or abandoned)
- Directions with early work but no recent follow-up (potential gaps)
Use Python to read data/papers/*/meta.json directly for statistical analysis.
Dimension 3: Methodological Comparison
Scan L3/L4 of workspace papers to construct a methodology matrix:
autor show <dir_name> --level 3
- Which methods are widely used?
- Which method combinations have not yet been tried?
- A method that works for problem A — can it transfer to problem B?
Dimension 4: Citation Graph Holes
autor shared-refs "<id1>" "<id2>"
autor refs "<id>"
autor citing "<id>"
- Which papers cite each other but reach contradictory conclusions? (unresolved disputes)
- Which heavily cited papers lack follow-up verification/replication?
- Which key references are absent from the workspace? (possible blind spots)
Dimension 5: Author-Stated Future Work
Load L3 of highly cited workspace papers and extract future directions, limitations, and unresolved questions. If L3 mode is inferred_synthesis, verify author-stated future work in L4 before treating it as the authors' own proposal:
autor show <dir_name> --level 3
Have those future directions been addressed? Cross-search to verify:
autor search "<future work keywords>"
3. Output Report
Generate a structured research-gap report and save it to workspace/<name>/research-gaps.md.
Classify each identified gap by type:
| Gap Type | Meaning | Example |
|---|
| Knowledge gap | A phenomenon/question no one has studied yet | "The X effect at high Re has not been measured" |
| Methodological gap | Existing conclusions but method has flaws or limitations | "All current studies use RANS; DNS validation is lacking" |
| Contradiction gap | Different studies reach contradictory conclusions | "Group A reports a positive effect; Group B reports a negative one" |
| Transfer gap | A method/finding has not been extended to a related domain | "This method works in 2D; 3D has not been attempted" |
| Scale gap | Only small-scale or restricted results exist | "Only low-Re data; not validated at engineering Re" |
Report structure:
- Field overview (2–3 paragraphs)
- Identified research gaps (ranked by priority)
- Gap type + description
- Supporting evidence (which papers hint at this gap)
- Potential research questions
- Feasibility assessment (are data / methods / resources accessible?)
- Unresolved disputes (if any)
- Recommended next steps
Quantitative support: when useful, write Python code to batch-extract data from meta.json, produce statistical charts (year distribution, method frequency, parameter-space coverage), and use visualizations to substantiate gap findings.
4. Interactive Discussion
After the report is generated, proactively discuss with the user:
- Which gaps are most relevant to their research direction?
- Are additional papers needed to validate a particular gap?
- Can a gap be refined into a specific research question and hypothesis?
Examples
User says: "Find research gaps in the drag-review workspace."
→ Comprehensively scan the literature, multi-dimensional analysis, generate research-gap report
User says: "What future work directions did these papers mention? Has anyone followed up?"
→ Extract future-work, limitation, and unresolved-question signals from each paper's L3 card, then cross-search and verify in L4 when needed
