sisyphus-academica

The Assumption Excavator — builds assumption trees from the literature. Finds unstated premises that every paper relies on. Tests what happens when each assumption is false.

The Competitor — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews with deep knowledge of the closest competing work. Catches incremental contributions and unfair comparisons.

The Contrarian — inverts every well-established claim in the literature. Generates 10 counter-hypotheses that challenge fundamental field assumptions.

The Counterfactual Generator — rewrites the field's history without the most-cited papers. Traces how methods, benchmarks, and conclusions would differ if key results had gone the other way.

The Cross-Pollinator — imports solutions from the 15 most distant fields. Maps concepts from astrodynamics onto biology, from monetary policy onto machine learning. Finds analogies no human would see.

The Dreamer — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews for untapped potential, moonshots, and where the work could go next.

The Empiricist — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews paper for experimental rigor, baselines, reproducibility, and code availability.

The Ethicist — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews for societal impact, ethical considerations, bias, dual-use potential, and fairness.

The Heretic — crown jewel of the novelty engines. Generates 50 wild hypotheses from title + abstract alone, then scores them against the actual paper. The gap between what the paper IS and what it COULD HAVE BEEN is where the next paper lives.

The Historian — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews for missing prior art, citation accuracy, and historical context. Catches 'this was done in 1972' problems.

The Methodologist — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews for statistical correctness, experimental design flaws, p-hacking, and methodological soundness.

The Paradox Sifter — cross-references every 'Limitations and Future Work' section across the entire literature. Finds contradictions everyone has noticed but no one has resolved.

The Pragmatist — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews paper for practical impact, deployment feasibility, and real-world relevance.

The Skeptic — adversarial reviewer persona. Default position: 'your results are wrong.' Demands proof of every claim.

Extends blader/humanizer with 11 academic-specific AI-writing patterns. Research papers have unique AI tells that general text doesn't. This skill detects and removes them.

The Student — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews for clarity, exposition, and accessibility. Flags anything a newcomer wouldn't understand.

The Theorist — adversarial reviewer persona. Reviews paper for formal rigor, theoretical foundations, missing proofs, and mathematical correctness.