| name | alterlab-research-pipeline |
| description | Orchestrates the full academic research pipeline (research, write, integrity check, review, revise, re-review, re-revise, final integrity check, finalize), coordinating alterlab-deep-research, alterlab-paper-writer, and alterlab-paper-reviewer into a seamless 10-stage workflow with mandatory integrity verification, two-stage peer review, and reproducible quality gates. Use when the request mentions academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, or complete paper workflow. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite. |
| license | MIT |
| allowed-tools | Read Write Edit Bash WebFetch WebSearch |
| compatibility | Orchestrates alterlab-deep-research, alterlab-paper-writer, and alterlab-paper-reviewer; uses built-in Claude tools only; no external API key or account required |
| metadata | {"skill-author":"AlterLab","version":"2.6","last_updated":"2026-03-08","depends_on":"alterlab-deep-research, alterlab-paper-writer, alterlab-paper-reviewer"} |
Academic Pipeline v2.6 — Full Academic Research Workflow Orchestrator
A lightweight orchestrator that manages the complete academic pipeline from research exploration to final manuscript. It does not perform substantive work — it only detects stages, recommends modes, dispatches skills, manages transitions, and tracks state.
v2.0 Core Improvements:
- Mandatory user confirmation checkpoints — Each stage completion requires user confirmation before proceeding to the next step
- Academic integrity verification — After paper completion and before review submission, 100% reference and data verification must pass
- Two-stage review — First full review + post-revision focused verification review
- Final integrity check — After revision completion, re-verify all citations and data are 100% correct
- Reproducible — Standardized workflow producing consistent quality assurance each time
- Process documentation — After pipeline completion, automatically generates a "Paper Creation Process Record" PDF documenting the human-AI collaboration history
Quick Start
Full workflow (from scratch):
I want to write a research paper on the impact of AI on higher education quality assurance
--> alterlab-research-pipeline launches, starting from Stage 1 (RESEARCH)
Mid-entry (existing paper):
I already have a paper, help me review it
--> alterlab-research-pipeline detects mid-entry, starting from Stage 2.5 (INTEGRITY)
Revision mode (received reviewer feedback):
I received reviewer comments, help me revise
--> alterlab-research-pipeline detects, starting from Stage 4 (REVISE)
Execution flow:
- Detect the user's current stage and available materials
- Recommend the optimal mode for each stage
- Dispatch the corresponding skill for each stage
- After each stage completion, proactively prompt and wait for user confirmation
- Track progress throughout; Pipeline Status Dashboard available at any time
Trigger Conditions
Trigger Keywords
English: academic pipeline, research to paper, full paper workflow, paper pipeline, end-to-end paper, research-to-publication, complete paper workflow
Non-Trigger Scenarios
| Scenario | Skill to Use |
|---|
| Only need to search materials or do a literature review | alterlab-deep-research |
| Only need to write a paper (no research phase needed) | alterlab-paper-writer |
| Only need to review a paper | alterlab-paper-reviewer |
| Only need to check citation format | alterlab-paper-writer (citation-check mode) |
| Only need to convert paper format | alterlab-paper-writer (format-convert mode) |
Trigger Exclusions
- If the user only needs a single function (just search materials, just check citations), no pipeline is needed — directly trigger the corresponding skill
- If the user is already using a specific mode of a skill, do not force them into the pipeline
- The pipeline is optional, not mandatory
Pipeline Stages (10 Stages)
| Stage | Name | Skill / Agent Called | Available Modes | Deliverables |
|---|
| 1 | RESEARCH | alterlab-deep-research | socratic, full, quick | RQ Brief, Methodology, Bibliography, Synthesis |
| 2 | WRITE | alterlab-paper-writer | plan, full | Paper Draft |
| 2.5 | INTEGRITY | integrity_verification_agent | pre-review | Integrity verification report + corrected paper |
| 3 | REVIEW | alterlab-paper-reviewer | full (incl. Devil's Advocate) | 5 review reports + Editorial Decision + Revision Roadmap |
| 4 | REVISE | alterlab-paper-writer | revision | Revised Draft, Response to Reviewers |
| 3' | RE-REVIEW | alterlab-paper-reviewer | re-review | Verification review report: revision response checklist + residual issues |
| 4' | RE-REVISE | alterlab-paper-writer | revision | Second revised draft (if needed) |
| 4.5 | FINAL INTEGRITY | integrity_verification_agent | final-check | Final verification report (must achieve 100% pass to proceed) |
| 5 | FINALIZE | alterlab-paper-writer | format-convert | Final Paper (default MD + DOCX; ask about LaTeX; confirm correctness; PDF) |
| 6 | PROCESS SUMMARY | orchestrator | auto | Paper creation process record MD + LaTeX to PDF (bilingual) |
Pipeline State Machine
- Stage 1 RESEARCH -> user confirmation -> Stage 2
- Stage 2 WRITE -> user confirmation -> Stage 2.5
- Stage 2.5 INTEGRITY -> PASS -> Stage 3 (FAIL -> fix and re-verify, max 3 rounds)
- Stage 3 REVIEW -> Accept -> Stage 4.5 / Minor|Major -> Stage 4 / Reject -> Stage 2 or end
- Stage 4 REVISE -> user confirmation -> Stage 3'
- Stage 3' RE-REVIEW -> Accept|Minor -> Stage 4.5 / Major -> Stage 4'
- Stage 4' RE-REVISE -> user confirmation -> Stage 4.5 (no return to review)
- Stage 4.5 FINAL INTEGRITY -> PASS (zero issues) -> Stage 5 (FAIL -> fix and re-verify)
- Stage 5 FINALIZE -> MD + DOCX -> ask about LaTeX -> confirm -> PDF -> Stage 6
- Stage 6 PROCESS SUMMARY -> ask language version -> generate process record MD -> LaTeX -> PDF -> end
See references/pipeline_state_machine.md for complete state transition definitions.
Adaptive Checkpoint System
Core rule: After each stage completion, the system must proactively prompt the user and wait for confirmation. The checkpoint presentation adapts based on context and user engagement.
Checkpoint Types
| Type | When Used | Content |
|---|
| FULL | First checkpoint; after integrity boundaries; before finalization | Full deliverables list + decision dashboard + all options |
| SLIM | After 2+ consecutive "continue" responses on non-critical stages | One-line status + auto-continue in 5 seconds |
| MANDATORY | Integrity FAIL; Review decision; Stage 5 | Cannot be skipped; requires explicit user input |
Decision Dashboard (shown at FULL checkpoints)
━━━ Stage [X] [Name] Complete ━━━
Metrics:
- Word count: [N] (target: [T] +/-10%) [OK/OVER/UNDER]
- References: [N] (min: [M]) [OK/LOW]
- Coverage: [N]/[T] sections drafted [COMPLETE/PARTIAL]
- Quality indicators: [score if available]
Deliverables:
- [Material 1]
- [Material 2]
Flagged: [any issues detected, or "None"]
Ready to proceed to Stage [Y]? You can also:
1. View progress (say "status")
2. Adjust settings
3. Pause pipeline
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Adaptive Rules
- First checkpoint: always FULL
- After 2+ consecutive "continue" without review: prompt user awareness ("You've auto-continued [N] times. Want to review progress?")
- Integrity boundaries (Stage 2.5, 4.5): always MANDATORY
- Review decisions (Stage 3, 3'): always MANDATORY
- Before finalization (Stage 5): always MANDATORY
- All other stages: start FULL, downgrade to SLIM if user says "just continue"
Checkpoint Rules
- Cannot auto-skip MANDATORY checkpoints: Even if the previous stage result is perfect, explicit user input is required at MANDATORY checkpoints
- User can adjust: At FULL and MANDATORY checkpoints, users can modify the mode or settings for the next step
- Pause-friendly: Users can pause at any checkpoint and resume later
- SLIM mode: If the user says "just continue" or "fully automatic," subsequent non-critical checkpoints switch to SLIM format (one-line status + auto-continue), but notifications are still sent
- Awareness guard: After 4+ consecutive auto-continues, the system inserts a FULL checkpoint regardless of stage type to ensure user remains engaged
Agent Team (3 Agents)
| # | Agent | Role | File |
|---|
| 1 | pipeline_orchestrator_agent | Main orchestrator: detects stage, recommends mode, triggers skill, manages transitions | agents/pipeline_orchestrator_agent.md |
| 2 | state_tracker_agent | State tracker: records completed stages, produced materials, revision loop count | agents/state_tracker_agent.md |
| 3 | integrity_verification_agent | Integrity verifier: 100% reference/citation/data verification | agents/integrity_verification_agent.md |
Orchestrator Workflow
The orchestrator runs a four-step loop for every stage:
- INTAKE & DETECTION — Analyze the user's materials to pick the entry stage (no materials -> Stage 1; paper draft -> Stage 2.5; review comments -> Stage 4; final draft -> Stage 5) and confirm entry point + goal.
- MODE RECOMMENDATION — Recommend per-stage modes by user type (novice -> socratic/plan/guided; experienced -> full; time-limited -> quick), explaining the trade-offs so the user chooses.
- STAGE EXECUTION — Dispatch the stage's skill (never doing the work itself), monitor completion, compile deliverables, update state via
state_tracker_agent, then raise a MANDATORY checkpoint.
- TRANSITION — After confirmation, pass deliverables forward via the per-stage handoff protocol, then begin the next stage.
Full detection decision tree, mode-selection matrix, and the complete per-stage handoff mapping: see references/orchestrator_workflow.md.
Integrity & Two-Stage Review Protocols (v2.0)
Stage 2.5 — First Integrity Check (pre-review): After WRITE, before REVIEW. integrity_verification_agent Mode 1 runs Phases A-E (100% reference existence, >=30% citation-context spot-check, 100% statistical data, >=30% originality + self-plagiarism, 30% claim spot-check / min 10 claims). PASS -> Stage 3; FAIL -> correction list, fix item-by-item, re-verify (max 3 rounds).
Stage 4.5 — Final Integrity Check (post-revision): After RE-REVISE / RE-REVIEW-Accept, before FINALIZE. Mode 2 runs Phases A-E at full coverage (100% citation-context, 100% claim verification, zero MAJOR_DISTORTION + zero UNVERIFIABLE required) and cross-checks that every Stage 2.5 issue is resolved. Must PASS with zero issues to reach Stage 5.
Stage 3 — First Review: EIC + R1 (methodology) + R2 (domain) + R3 (interdisciplinary) + Devil's Advocate. Output: 5 reports + Editorial Decision + Revision Roadmap + Socratic Revision Coaching. Accept -> Stage 4.5 / Minor|Major -> Stage 4 / Reject -> Stage 2 or end.
Stage 3' — Verification Review: re-review mode over revised draft + Response to Reviewers. Output: revision-response comparison table + new-issues list + new Editorial Decision. Accept|Minor -> Stage 4.5 / Major -> Stage 4'.
Revision Coaching (Stage 3->4, max 8 rounds) and Residual Coaching (Stage 3'->4', max 5 rounds) use EIC Socratic dialogue; the user can say "just fix it" to skip. Full phase-by-phase execution steps, result handling, and coaching detail: see references/integrity_and_review_protocols.md.
Mid-Entry Protocol
Users can enter from any stage. The orchestrator will:
- Detect materials: Analyze the content provided by the user to determine what is available
- Identify gaps: Check what prerequisite materials are needed for the target stage
- Suggest backfilling: If critical materials are missing, suggest whether to return to earlier stages
- Direct entry: If materials are sufficient, directly start the specified stage
Important: mid-entry cannot skip Stage 2.5
- If the user brings a paper and enters directly, go through Stage 2.5 (INTEGRITY) first before Stage 3 (REVIEW)
- Only exception: User can provide a previous integrity verification report and content has not been modified
External Review Protocol (Added in v2.5)
Scenario: The user submitted to a journal and received feedback from real human reviewers, bringing those comments into the pipeline.
Trigger: User says "I received reviewer comments," "reviewer comments," "revise and resubmit," etc.
Unlike internal simulated review, external review handles unstructured, variable-quality human comments that must be judged (accept / partially accept / reject) rather than accepted wholesale. The four-step workflow is: (1) intake and structuring into an External Review Summary with user confirmation; (2) strategic revision coaching (judgment + strategy + risk assessment per Major comment, no default "accept all", max 8 rounds); (3) revision + point-by-point Response to Reviewers letter; (4) self-verification for completeness/consistency/truthfulness. Honest capability boundaries apply: AI verification does not equal human-reviewer satisfaction, and final scholarly judgment rests with the researcher.
Full comparison table, per-step templates (External Review Summary, Response to Reviewers), coaching questions, and the four capability-boundary caveats: see references/external_review_protocol.md.
Progress Dashboard
Users can say "status" or "pipeline status" at any time to view:
+=============================================+
| Academic Pipeline v2.0 Status |
+=============================================+
| Topic: Impact of AI on Higher Education |
| Quality Assurance |
+---------------------------------------------+
Stage 1 RESEARCH [v] Completed
Stage 2 WRITE [v] Completed
Stage 2.5 INTEGRITY [v] PASS (62/62 refs verified)
Stage 3 REVIEW (1st) [v] Major Revision (5 items)
Stage 4 REVISE [v] Completed (5/5 addressed)
Stage 3' RE-REVIEW (2nd) [v] Accept
Stage 4' RE-REVISE [-] Skipped (Accept)
Stage 4.5 FINAL INTEGRITY [..] In Progress
Stage 5 FINALIZE [ ] Pending
Stage 6 PROCESS SUMMARY [ ] Pending
+---------------------------------------------+
| Integrity Verification: |
| Pre-review: PASS (0 issues) |
| Final: In progress... |
+---------------------------------------------+
| Review History: |
| Round 1: Major Revision (5 required) |
| Round 2: Accept |
+=============================================+
See templates/pipeline_status_template.md for the output template.
Revision Loop Management
- Stage 3 (first review) -> Stage 4 (revision) -> Stage 3' (verification review) -> Stage 4' (re-revision, if needed) -> Stage 4.5 (final verification)
- Maximum 1 round of RE-REVISE (Stage 4'): If Stage 3' gives Major, enter Stage 4' for revision then proceed directly to Stage 4.5 (no return to review)
- Pipeline overrides alterlab-paper-writer's max 2 revision rule: In the pipeline, revisions are limited to Stage 4 + Stage 4' (one round each), replacing alterlab-paper-writer's max 2 rounds rule
- Mark unresolved issues as Acknowledged Limitations
- Provide cumulative revision history (each round's decision, items addressed, unresolved items)
Reproducibility
v2.0 design ensures consistent quality assurance with each execution: mandatory Stage 2.5 + 4.5 integrity checks that cannot be skipped, five fixed review perspectives (EIC + R1/R2/R3 + Devil's Advocate), standardized verification search templates, explicit PASS/FAIL thresholds (zero SERIOUS + zero MEDIUM + zero MAJOR_DISTORTION + zero UNVERIFIABLE), and per-stage recorded deliverables for retrospective audit. When the pipeline ends, state_tracker_agent produces a complete audit trail.
Standardized-workflow guarantee table and the full end-of-pipeline audit-trail template: see references/reproducibility_and_audit.md.
Stage 6: Process Summary Protocol (Added in v2.4)
Trigger: After Stage 5 (FINALIZE) completion
Purpose: Document the complete human-AI collaboration history for the paper creation process, for user sharing, reporting, or reflection
Workflow: ask language preference (zh / en / both) -> review session history and compile user quotes, per-stage decisions, iteration details, and pipeline statistics -> generate Markdown (paper_creation_process.md / _en.md) -> convert to LaTeX and compile PDF via tectonic (Chinese uses xeCJK + Source Han Serif TC VF). The record ends with a mandatory Collaboration Quality Evaluation — a /insight-style final chapter scoring the user 1-100 across six dimensions (Direction Setting, Intellectual Contribution, Quality Gatekeeping, Iteration Discipline, Delegation Efficiency, Meta-Learning) with honest, evidence-based, constructive analysis (What Worked Well / Missed Opportunities / Recommendations / Human vs AI Value-Add / Claude self-reflection).
Full workflow steps, required-content table, six-dimension score card, scoring-criteria bands, required subsections, evaluation principles, and output specifications: see references/process_summary_protocol.md.
Quality Standards
| Dimension | Requirement |
|---|
| Stage detection | Correctly identify user's current stage and available materials |
| Mode recommendation | Recommend appropriate mode based on user preferences and material status |
| Material handoff | Stage-to-stage handoff materials are complete and correctly formatted |
| State tracking | Pipeline state updated in real time; Progress Dashboard accurate |
| Mandatory checkpoint | User confirmation required after each stage completion |
| Mandatory integrity check | Stage 2.5 and 4.5 cannot be skipped, must PASS |
| No overstepping | Orchestrator does not perform substantive research/writing/reviewing, only dispatching |
| No forcing | User can pause or exit pipeline at any time (but cannot skip integrity checks) |
| Reproducible | Same input follows the same workflow across different sessions |
Error Recovery
| Stage | Error | Handling |
|---|
| Intake | Cannot determine entry point | Ask user what materials they have and their goal |
| Stage 1 | alterlab-deep-research not converging | Suggest mode switch (socratic -> full) or narrow scope |
| Stage 2 | Missing research foundation | Suggest returning to Stage 1 to supplement research |
| Stage 2.5 | Still FAIL after 3 correction rounds | List unverifiable items; user decides whether to continue |
| Stage 3 | Review result is Reject | Provide options: major restructuring (Stage 2) or abandon |
| Stage 4 | Revision incomplete on all items | List unaddressed items; ask whether to continue |
| Stage 3' | Verification still has major issues | Enter Stage 4' for final revision |
| Stage 4' | Issues remain after revision | Mark as Acknowledged Limitations; proceed to Stage 4.5 |
| Stage 4.5 | Final verification FAIL | Fix and re-verify (max 3 rounds) |
| Any | User leaves midway | Save pipeline state; can resume from breakpoint next time |
| Any | Skill execution failure | Report error; suggest retry or skip |
Agent File References
| Agent | Definition File |
|---|
| pipeline_orchestrator_agent | agents/pipeline_orchestrator_agent.md |
| state_tracker_agent | agents/state_tracker_agent.md |
| integrity_verification_agent | agents/integrity_verification_agent.md |
Reference Files
| Reference | Purpose |
|---|
references/pipeline_state_machine.md | Complete state machine definition: all legal transitions, preconditions, actions |
references/orchestrator_workflow.md | Full four-step orchestration loop: detection decision tree, mode-selection matrix, per-stage handoff mapping |
references/integrity_and_review_protocols.md | Stage 2.5/4.5 integrity gates + Stage 3/3' two-stage review: phase-by-phase execution steps and coaching detail |
references/external_review_protocol.md | Full external (real journal) review workflow: intake templates, strategic coaching, Response to Reviewers, capability boundaries |
references/reproducibility_and_audit.md | Standardized-workflow guarantee table + full end-of-pipeline audit-trail template |
references/process_summary_protocol.md | Stage 6 process record: workflow, required content, Collaboration Quality Evaluation score card, output specs |
references/plagiarism_detection_protocol.md | Phase D originality verification protocol + self-plagiarism + AI text characteristics |
references/mode_advisor.md | Unified cross-skill decision tree: maps user intent to optimal skill + mode |
references/claim_verification_protocol.md | Phase E claim verification protocol: claim extraction, source tracing, cross-referencing, verdict taxonomy |
references/team_collaboration_protocol.md | Multi-person team coordination: role definitions, handoff protocol, version control, conflict resolution |
shared/handoff_schemas.md | Cross-skill data contracts: 9 schemas for all inter-stage handoff artifacts |
Templates
| Template | Purpose |
|---|
templates/pipeline_status_template.md | Progress Dashboard output template |
Examples
| Example | Demonstrates |
|---|
examples/full_pipeline_example.md | Complete pipeline conversation log (Stage 1-5, with integrity + 2-stage review) |
examples/mid_entry_example.md | Mid-entry example starting from Stage 2.5 (existing paper -> integrity check -> review -> revision -> finalization) |
Output Language
Follows user language. Academic terminology retained in English.
Integration with Other Skills
alterlab-research-pipeline dispatches the following skills (does not do work itself):
Stage 1: alterlab-deep-research
- socratic mode: Guided research exploration
- full mode: Complete research report
- quick mode: Quick research summary
Stage 2: alterlab-paper-writer
- plan mode: Socratic chapter-by-chapter guidance
- full mode: Complete paper writing
Stage 2.5: integrity_verification_agent (Mode 1: pre-review)
Stage 4.5: integrity_verification_agent (Mode 2: final-check)
Stage 3: alterlab-paper-reviewer
- full mode: Complete 5-person review (EIC + R1/R2/R3 + Devil's Advocate)
Stage 3': alterlab-paper-reviewer
- re-review mode: Verification review (focused on revision responses)
Stage 4/4': alterlab-paper-writer (revision mode)
Stage 5: alterlab-paper-writer (format-convert mode)
- Step 1: Ask user which academic formatting style (APA 7.0 / Chicago / IEEE, etc.)
- Step 2: Auto-produce MD + DOCX
- Step 3: Produce LaTeX (using corresponding document class, e.g., apa7 class for APA 7.0)
- Step 4: After user confirms content is correct, tectonic compiles PDF (final version)
- Fonts: Times New Roman (English) + Source Han Serif TC VF (Chinese) + Courier New (monospace)
- PDF must be compiled from LaTeX (HTML-to-PDF is prohibited)
Related Skills
| Skill | Relationship |
|---|
alterlab-deep-research | Dispatched (Stage 1 research phase) |
alterlab-paper-writer | Dispatched (Stage 2 writing, Stage 4/4' revision, Stage 5 formatting) |
alterlab-paper-reviewer | Dispatched (Stage 3 first review, Stage 3' verification review) |
Version Info
| Item | Content |
|---|
| Skill Version | 2.6 |
| Last Updated | 2026-03-08 |
| Maintainer | AlterLab |
| Dependent Skills | alterlab-deep-research v2.0+, alterlab-paper-writer v2.0+, alterlab-paper-reviewer v1.1+ |
| Role | Full academic research workflow orchestrator |
Changelog
| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|
| 2.6 | 2026-03-08 | Handoff Data Schema: Enhanced shared/handoff_schemas.md with 9 comprehensive schemas (RQ Brief, Bibliography, Synthesis, Paper Draft, Integrity Report, Review Report, Revision Roadmap, Response to Reviewers, Material Passport) with full field definitions, type constraints, and validation rules; orchestrator validates output against schemas before each transition. Adaptive Checkpoint System: Replaced static checkpoint template with 3-tier system (FULL/SLIM/MANDATORY) based on stage criticality and user engagement; FULL checkpoints include decision dashboard with metrics; SLIM auto-continues for experienced users; MANDATORY cannot be bypassed at integrity/review/finalization boundaries; awareness guard after 4+ auto-continues. Mode Advisor: New references/mode_advisor.md with unified cross-skill decision tree, common misconceptions table, user archetype recommendations, decision flowchart, and anti-patterns guide. Team Collaboration Protocol: New references/team_collaboration_protocol.md with 5 role definitions, per-transition handoff procedures, git branching/tagging strategy, conflict resolution matrix, and communication templates; state tracker extended with assigned_to, approval_gate, team_notes per stage and schema_validation_log. Phase E Claim Verification: New references/claim_verification_protocol.md with E1 claim extraction, E2 source tracing, E3 cross-referencing; verdict taxonomy (VERIFIED / MINOR_DISTORTION / MAJOR_DISTORTION / UNVERIFIABLE / UNVERIFIABLE_ACCESS); severity mapping (MAJOR_DISTORTION -> SERIOUS, UNVERIFIABLE -> SERIOUS, MINOR_DISTORTION -> MINOR, UNVERIFIABLE_ACCESS -> MEDIUM); integrated into integrity_verification_agent Mode 1 (30% spot-check) and Mode 2 (100%); pass/fail criteria updated to include Phase E verdicts. Mid-Entry Material Passport Check: Pipeline orchestrator now validates Material Passport on mid-entry; decision tree checks verification_status, freshness (< 24 hours), and content modification (version_label comparison); offers skip/spot-check/full re-verify options for Stage 2.5 when passport is valid; passport freshness validation rules added to shared/handoff_schemas.md |
| 2.5 | 2026-03-08 | External Review Protocol: structured intake of real journal reviewer feedback (text/PDF/DOCX); 4-step workflow (parse -> strategic coaching -> revise + Response to Reviewers -> completeness check); differentiated behavior from internal simulated review (no default "accept all", risk assessment per comment, user confirmation of parsed items); explicit capability boundaries (AI verification ≠ reviewer satisfaction) |
