| name | paper-to-intuition |
| description | Transforms an academic paper into deep, multi-layered understanding. Use when asked to explain a paper, break down a research paper, understand an arXiv paper, or build intuition for a technical concept from a paper. Generates explanations at multiple levels plus visual intuition diagrams. |
Paper to Intuition
Transform dense academic papers into genuine understanding through layered explanation and visual intuition.
Process
- Get the paper - Ask for the arXiv link, PDF, or paper title
- Extract the core - Identify the single key insight (one sentence)
- Build the ladder - Create explanations at 4 levels
- Visualize intuition - Generate interactive diagrams
- Stress test understanding - "What breaks if we remove X?"
The Explanation Ladder
Generate explanations at each level, with each building on the last:
Level 1: ELI5 (1 paragraph)
- No jargon, no equations
- Use familiar analogies from everyday life
- A curious 10-year-old should roughly get it
Level 2: Undergraduate (2-3 paragraphs)
- Assume calculus, basic linear algebra, intro ML
- Introduce key terms with definitions
- Connect to textbook concepts they'd know
Level 3: Graduate (3-4 paragraphs)
- Assume ML fundamentals, optimization, probability
- Discuss relationship to prior work
- Explain why naive approaches don't work
- Cover the key equations with plain-English annotations
Level 4: Researcher (2-3 paragraphs)
- Assume field expertise
- Subtle technical contributions
- Limitations and open questions
- How this changes what's possible
Key Equations Breakdown
For each important equation:
[Equation in LaTeX]
In words: [Plain English translation]
Each term:
- [symbol]: [what it represents] [why it's there]
Intuition: [Why this mathematical form? What would change if we used a different form?]
Visual Intuition Artifact
Generate a self-contained HTML file with:
- Architecture diagram - Boxes and arrows showing information flow
- Interactive sliders - Manipulate key parameters, see effects
- Before/after comparisons - What the method improves over baselines
- Failure case visualization - When and why it breaks down
Use SVG for diagrams, vanilla JavaScript for interactivity. Dark theme, clean typography.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>[Paper Name] - Visual Intuition</title>
<style>
:root { --bg: #1a1a2e; --text: #eee; --accent: #4f8cff; }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<h1>[Paper Title]</h1>
<p class="tldr">[One-sentence insight]</p>
<section id="architecture">
<svg></svg>
</section>
<section id="interactive">
</section>
<section id="comparisons">
</section>
</body>
</html>
The "What Breaks?" Analysis
For each major component, explain:
- What it does - The role this component plays
- What breaks without it - Concrete failure mode
- Why this solution - Alternatives considered, why this won
- The tradeoff - What we pay for this choice (compute, complexity, assumptions)
Output Structure
Deliver as a structured document:
# [Paper Title]
**TL;DR:** [One sentence]
**Why it matters:** [One paragraph on significance]
## The Explanation Ladder
### ELI5
[...]
### Undergraduate Level
[...]
### Graduate Level
[...]
### Researcher Level
[...]
## Key Equations
### Equation 1: [Name]
[Breakdown as specified above]
## What Breaks If We Remove...
### [Component 1]
[Analysis]
### [Component 2]
[Analysis]
## Visual Intuition
[Link to or embed HTML artifact]
## Further Reading
- [Prerequisite paper 1]
- [Follow-up work 1]
Quality Standards
- Every analogy must be accurate, not just catchy
- Equations must be explained, not just translated
- Visuals must reveal structure, not just decorate
- The researcher-level section should contain insight, not just summary
- Admit when something is genuinely confusing or poorly explained in the original paper
