来源信息
- 仓库
- brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills
- 最近来源活动
- 2026年4月3日 02:07
- 检测到的 SKILL.md 语言
- 英语
- 星标
- 3,291
- 分支
- 432
安装方式
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt;你也可以切换为直接命令,或下载本地副本。
检查来源文件
决定是否安装前,请先阅读 SKILL.md,以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
菜单
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt;你也可以切换为直接命令,或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前,请先阅读 SKILL.md,以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill reference-manager-comparison命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
基于 SOC 职业分类
正在显示 SKILL.md
| name | reference-manager-comparison |
| description | Compare Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote, and Paperpile for research use |
| metadata | {"openclaw":{"emoji":"🗂️","category":"writing","subcategory":"citation","keywords":["reference manager","Zotero","Mendeley","EndNote","Paperpile","citation management"],"source":"wentor-research-plugins"}} |
A skill for selecting and configuring the right reference management tool for your research workflow. Provides an in-depth comparison of Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote, and Paperpile across features, pricing, integration, collaboration, and discipline-specific needs.
| Feature | Zotero | Mendeley | EndNote | Paperpile |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | Free (300MB cloud) | Free (2GB cloud) | ~$275 or institutional | $36/year (academic) |
| Platform | Win/Mac/Linux | Win/Mac/Linux | Win/Mac | Web + Chrome |
| Word plugin | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes (Google Docs too) |
| LaTeX export | BibTeX, BibLaTeX | BibTeX | BibTeX | BibTeX |
| PDF annotation | Basic (built-in reader) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Group libraries | Yes (unlimited, 300MB free) | Yes (limited free) | Via EndNote Online | Yes |
| Browser extension | Excellent (Zotero Connector) | Web Importer | Capture (limited) | Excellent |
| Open source | Yes (GPLv3) | No | No | No |
| Offline access | Full | Full | Full | Limited |
| Storage upgrade | $20/year (2GB) | $55/year (5GB) | Unlimited (desktop) | Unlimited |
- Free and open source with strong community
- Best browser extension for capturing metadata
- Excellent plugin ecosystem:
* Better BibTeX (superior LaTeX integration)
* ZotFile (PDF management and renaming)
* Zotero OCR (extract text from scanned PDFs)
* Scite (citation context analysis)
- Works on all platforms including Linux
- Syncs across devices; self-hosting is possible
- Transparent data format (SQLite, exportable)
def recommended_zotero_plugins() -> list[dict]:
"""
Essential Zotero plugins for academic researchers.
"""
return [
{
"name": "Better BibTeX",
"purpose": "Automatic .bib file export, stable citation keys",
"install": "github.com/retorquere/zotero-better-bibtex",
"priority": "Essential for LaTeX users"
},
{
"name": "ZotFile",
"purpose": "Rename and organize attached PDFs",
"install": "zotfile.com",
"priority": "Highly recommended"
},
{
"name": "Zotero Storage Scanner",
"purpose": "Find broken attachments and duplicates",
"install": "Available via Zotero plugin manager",
"priority": "Useful for library maintenance"
},
{
"name": "DOI Manager",
"purpose": "Fetch missing DOIs for your references",
"install": "Available via Zotero plugin manager",
"priority": "Recommended for bibliography accuracy"
}
]
- Free with generous 2GB cloud storage
- Built-in PDF reader with annotation tools
- Mendeley Suggest recommends related papers
- Strong institutional adoption
- Social features (researcher profiles, groups)
- Owned by Elsevier (data privacy concerns for some users)
- Desktop app development has slowed (focus shifted to web)
- Limited plugin ecosystem compared to Zotero
- BibTeX export can have formatting inconsistencies
- Group library size limitations on free tier
- Deep integration with Web of Science
- Mature product with decades of development
- Excellent Word plugin (Cite While You Write)
- Strong institutional support and training resources
- Handles very large libraries (10,000+ references) well
- Expensive for individual purchase
- No Linux support
- Closed format (vendor lock-in risk)
- Steeper learning curve
- Limited free collaboration features
- Excellent Google Docs and Google Scholar integration
- Clean, modern interface
- Very fast browser-based workflow
- Built-in PDF viewer with annotation
- Automatic metadata extraction from PDFs
- No desktop app (requires internet for full functionality)
- Chrome-only browser extension
- No Linux-native app (web-based works on all platforms)
- Smaller user community than Zotero or Mendeley
If you use LaTeX primarily:
-> Zotero + Better BibTeX (best .bib integration)
If you use Google Docs primarily:
-> Paperpile (native Docs integration)
If your institution provides it:
-> EndNote (maximize institutional support)
If you want free + open source:
-> Zotero (no contest)
If you need built-in recommendations:
-> Mendeley or Paperpile (suggest related papers)
If you collaborate heavily:
-> Zotero groups or Paperpile shared folders
If you have a very large library (50,000+ items):
-> EndNote or Zotero (both handle large libraries well)
All major reference managers support BibTeX and RIS export formats, making migration possible:
Export from source tool:
- Zotero: File > Export Library > BibTeX/RIS
- Mendeley: Tools > Export (BibTeX)
- EndNote: File > Export > RIS/BibTeX
- Paperpile: Settings > Export > BibTeX
Import to target tool:
- Drag and drop the exported file into the new tool
- Review imported entries for metadata accuracy
- Re-attach PDFs if they did not transfer automatically
| Data | Transfers? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Metadata (title, author, year) | Yes | Via BibTeX/RIS |
| PDFs | Sometimes | Depends on export settings |
| Annotations/highlights | Rarely | Usually tool-specific format |
| Folder/collection structure | Sometimes | Zotero RDF preserves collections |
| Tags | Usually | Via RIS or Zotero RDF |
| Notes | Sometimes | Check export format |
Choose your reference manager early in your research career and invest time in organizing your library -- the cost of switching grows with library size.