메뉴
当你在为《自动化学报》(Acta Automatica Sinica, AAS) 撰写相关工作、文献综述或确立创新性(delta)时调用。给出以差异为先的文献组织法、控制/自动化/模式识别方向代表作的覆盖策略、与最接近工作的对比表、避免"重复前人/无新意"初审退稿的自检，以及综述栏目所需的分类框架与批判性评价方法，帮助在 Acta Automatica Sinica 的中英文双语与综述长文传统下清晰界定本文相对已有研究的增量。
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
Use when preparing the accountability artifacts that accompany an ACM FAccT paper — datasheets for datasets, model cards, data statements, audit and impact-assessment documentation, and released code/data — since FAccT's culture centers documentation and accountability infrastructure rather than a formal ACM artifact-badging track; covers what makes each genre credible, anonymized-review versus public-release versions, and consistency with the paper's harm claims.
Use when drafting ACM FAccT author responses — the short factual-correction rebuttal after preliminary reviews, and, distinctively for the 2026-new process, the Revise-and-resubmit round where you address Area-Chair-prioritized concerns from a mixed CS+law+social-science panel, map each to a concrete change, and survive a re-review while keeping mutual anonymity.
Use when preparing an accepted ACM FAccT paper for camera-ready — de-anonymizing and adding the withheld Positionality/Acknowledgements statements, switching to the acmart sigconf proceedings format, ACM metadata (DOI, ORCID, CCS concepts, rights), the two-round camera-ready calendar for Accept vs Revise papers, ACM Open Access, finalizing datasheets/model cards, and integrating required changes without scope creep.
Use when designing or auditing ACM FAccT empirical work — quantitative fairness audits with disaggregated metrics and fair baselines, qualitative and participatory studies with coding and reflexivity, mixed-methods designs, sound handling of protected attributes and proxies, consent and IRB for human-subjects and community-facing work, and matching evidence to the shape of a fairness/accountability/transparency claim.
Use when positioning an ACM FAccT submission across its many disciplinary lanes — algorithmic fairness/ML, HCI, law and policy, STS and critical theory, and prior FAccT/FAT* proceedings — writing delta-first contrast that a mixed reviewer pool will accept, citing borrowed constructs to their real origin, keeping self-citations mutually anonymous, and declaring overlap with workshops, preprints, and prior versions.
Use when strengthening ACM FAccT transparency and reproducibility — releasing code, data, and analysis for quantitative audits; documenting datasets and models with datasheets, model cards, and data statements; making qualitative and participatory work auditable without breaking confidentiality; pinning provenance for scraped and model-generated data; and keeping the paper, the supplementary material, and any released artifact consistent.
| name | aas-related-work |
| description | 当你在为《自动化学报》(Acta Automatica Sinica, AAS) 撰写相关工作、文献综述或确立创新性(delta)时调用。给出以差异为先的文献组织法、控制/自动化/模式识别方向代表作的覆盖策略、与最接近工作的对比表、避免"重复前人/无新意"初审退稿的自检，以及综述栏目所需的分类框架与批判性评价方法，帮助在 Acta Automatica Sinica 的中英文双语与综述长文传统下清晰界定本文相对已有研究的增量。 |
本技能帮你为《自动化学报》(Acta Automatica Sinica, AAS) 写出以 delta 为先的相关工作与综述。
AAS 只发表创新性成果，初审对"重复前人、无新意"很敏感，相关工作是证明创新性的主战场。以下方法于
2026-07-09 核验框架（见 resources/official-source-map.md）。
相关工作不是文献罗列，而是用他人工作反衬本文增量。每引一组工作，都要落到"他们做了什么、局限 在哪、本文如何突破"。
[主题簇] ___（如：含饱和的多智能体一致性）
[代表作] 文献[a][b][c]
[他们的局限] a: 依赖全局信息；b: 仅局部稳定；c: 未考虑饱和
[本文 delta] 仅邻居信息 + 全局一致性 + 反饱和
| 层次 | 覆盖什么 |
|---|---|
| 奠基工作 | 该方向经典模型/定理（一致性、Lyapunov 稳定、经典识别方法） |
| 最接近工作 | 与本文问题设定最相近的 3~5 篇，逐一对比 |
| 近两年进展 | 反映当前前沿，含本刊与兄弟刊近作 |
| 交叉与反例 | 相邻方向、可能质疑本文的工作 |
优先引本领域高质量来源；本刊《自动化学报》(Acta Automatica Sinica) 及控制/自动化主流刊的近作应有 适当覆盖，体现对本刊话语体系的了解。
用一张表把本文与最接近工作对齐，列维度可含：系统模型、假设、信息需求、稳定性结论、是否处理约束、 实验验证方式。表末一行是"本文"，直观呈现 delta。
| 工作 | 系统 | 信息需求 | 稳定性 | 约束处理 | 验证 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 文献[a] | 一阶 | 全局 | 渐近 | 无 | 仿真 |
| 文献[b] | 二阶 | 邻居 | 局部 | 无 | 仿真 |
| 本文 | 二阶 | 邻居 | 全局渐近 | 饱和 | 仿真+实物 |
投综述栏目时，相关工作升级为全文主体，需要：
aas-writing-style）。[目标刊] 《自动化学报》(Acta Automatica Sinica, AAS) [栏目] 综述/论文/短文
[主题簇] 1.___ 2.___ 3.___
[每簇代表作与局限] ...
[对比表维度] 系统/假设/信息需求/稳定性/约束/验证
[本文 delta 一句话] ___
[综述专属] 分类框架? 批判评价? 未解问题?
[自检] 无遗漏削弱新颖性的近作? 自引中性保双盲?
系统检索是 delta 可信的前提，综述稿更须写清检索方法：
| 要素 | 内容 |
|---|---|
| 数据库 | CNKI/万方/维普 + Web of Science/IEEE/Scopus |
| 关键词 | 中英文对照的领域术语组合 |
| 时间范围 | 近若干年 + 奠基经典 |
| 纳入/排除 | 主题相关性、质量、可获取性 |
| 追踪 | 高被引文的引文网络（引用与被引） |
综述可把检索策略写进正文或附录（见 aas-supplementary），显著提升可信度与可复现性。
避免相关工作过长喧宾夺主（论文），也避免过短无法支撑创新性主张。
相关工作确立的 delta 要在摘要、引言贯通一致：
[相关工作] 指出最接近工作的局限 → [引言] 收束为本文 gap → [贡献] 可数陈述 → [摘要] 报道性呈现
三处口径一致，外审才能形成清晰的创新性判断，避免"摘要说的贡献在正文找不到对应"的割裂。