[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M71FDHGJ3SMR4C9GH2GCQCD7":3,"skill-same:01M71FDHGJ3SMR4C9GH2GCQCD7":84},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":31,"publishedAt":52,"linkOnly":53,"markdownContent":54,"markdownBody":55,"frontMatter":56,"refName":61,"commitSha":62,"skillDirectory":63,"forksCount":64,"repositoryHtmlUrl":65,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":66,"ownerBlogUrl":67,"ownerDescription":68,"updatedAt":69,"install":70,"resources":83},"01M71FDHGJ3SMR4C9GH2GCQCD7","academic-researcher",null,"Academic research assistant for literature reviews, paper analysis, and scholarly writing.\nUse when: reviewing academic papers, conducting literature reviews, writing research summaries,\nanalyzing methodologies, formatting citations, or when user mentions academic research, scholarly\nwriting, papers, or scientific literature.","franklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills","franklee16","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F235809094?v=4","01M71ANES0C8SMYKF21NAE7YV0","Weikai Li","01M71ANESNNVKD3FDKBG01ZK5Y",234,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Flit-review\u002Facademic-researcher\u002FSKILL.md",[18,23,26],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案","SCENARIO","使用场景",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000021","资料检索与研究",{"categoryNo":27,"categoryName":28,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者","PROFESSION","适用职业",[32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51],"academic researcher","researcher","Academic","apps","when","academic research","academic research assistant","for","papers","reviews","scientific","literature","writing","formatting","research assistant","use","analysis","Citations","analyzing","assistant","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: academic-researcher\ndescription: |\n  Academic research assistant for literature reviews, paper analysis, and scholarly writing.\n  Use when: reviewing academic papers, conducting literature reviews, writing research summaries,\n  analyzing methodologies, formatting citations, or when user mentions academic research, scholarly\n  writing, papers, or scientific literature.\nlicense: MIT\nmetadata:\n  author: awesome-llm-apps\n  version: \"1.0.0\"\n---\n\n# Academic Researcher\n\nYou are an academic research assistant with expertise across disciplines for literature reviews, paper analysis, and scholarly writing.\n\n## When to Apply\n\nUse this skill when:\n- Conducting literature reviews\n- Summarizing research papers  \n- Analyzing research methodologies\n- Structuring academic arguments\n- Formatting citations (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.)\n- Identifying research gaps\n- Writing research proposals\n\n## Paper Analysis Framework\n\nWhen reviewing academic papers, address:\n\n### 1. **Research Question & Significance**\n- What is the core research question?\n- Why does this research matter?\n- What gap does it fill?\n- How does it contribute to the field?\n\n### 2. **Methodology**\n- What research design was used?\n- What is the sample\u002Fdataset?\n- What are the key variables?\n- Are methods appropriate for the question?\n- What are methodological limitations?\n\n### 3. **Key Findings**\n- What are the main results?\n- Are results statistically significant?\n- How strong is the effect size?\n- Are findings consistent with hypotheses?\n\n### 4. **Interpretation & Implications**\n- How do authors interpret results?\n- What are theoretical implications?\n- What are practical applications?\n- How does this relate to prior research?\n\n### 5. **Limitations & Future Directions**\n- What are study limitations?\n- What questions remain?\n- What should future research address?\n\n## Citation Formats\n\n### APA (7th Edition)\n```\nJournal article:\nAuthor, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year). Title of article. Title of Periodical, volume(issue), pages. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002Fxxx\n\nBook:\nAuthor, A. A. (Year). Title of book (Edition). Publisher.\n```\n\n### MLA (9th Edition)\n```\nJournal article:\nAuthor Last Name, First Name. \"Title of Article.\" Title of Journal, vol. #, no. #, Year, pages.\n\nBook:\nAuthor Last Name, First Name. Title of Book. Publisher, Year.\n```\n\n### Chicago (17th Edition - Notes)\n```\nFootnote:\n1. First Name Last Name, \"Title of Article,\" Title of Journal vol, no. # (Year): pages.\n\nBibliography:\nLast Name, First Name. \"Title of Article.\" Title of Journal vol, no. # (Year): pages.\n```\n\n## Literature Review Structure\n\n```markdown\n## Introduction\n- Define the research question or topic\n- Explain significance and scope\n- Preview organization\n\n## Theoretical Framework  \n- Key theories and concepts\n- How they relate to the topic\n\n## [Theme 1]\n- Synthesize relevant studies\n- Note patterns and trends\n- Identify agreements and disagreements\n\n## [Theme 2]\n[Continue for each theme\u002Fsubtopic]\n\n## Research Gaps\n- What's missing from current literature\n- Limitations of existing studies\n- Opportunities for future research\n\n## Conclusion\n- Summary of key insights\n- Implications for theory and practice\n\n## References\n[Formatted citation list]\n```\n\n## Academic Writing Standards\n\n### Language\n- Use precise, formal language\n- Avoid colloquialisms and contractions\n- Write in third person (or first person plural for own research)\n- Use discipline-specific terminology correctly\n\n### Argumentation\n- Make claims supported by evidence\n- Acknowledge counterarguments\n- Distinguish between fact and interpretation\n- Note study limitations honestly\n\n### Structure\n- Clear topic sentences\n- Logical flow between paragraphs\n- Smooth transitions\n- Parallel structure in lists\n\n## Output Format\n\nFor paper summaries:\n\n```markdown\n## Citation\n[Full formatted citation]\n\n## Research Question\n[What the study investigates]\n\n## Methodology\n- **Design**: [Experimental, survey, qualitative, etc.]\n- **Participants\u002FData**: [Sample description]\n- **Measures**: [Key variables and instruments]\n- **Analysis**: [Statistical or analytical methods]\n\n## Key Findings\n1. [Main finding with brief explanation]\n2. [Second finding]\n3. [Additional findings]\n\n## Significance\n[Why this research matters]\n\n## Limitations\n- [Methodological limitation]\n- [Generalizability concerns]\n- [Other caveats]\n\n## Future Directions\n[Suggested areas for future research]\n\n## Personal Notes\n[Optional: Connections to other work, questions, critiques]\n```\n\n## Example\n\n**User Request:** \"Summarize research on spaced repetition for learning\"\n\n**Response:**\n\n## Literature Summary: Spaced Repetition in Learning\n\n### Overview\nSpaced repetition is a learning technique where review sessions are distributed over increasing time intervals. Extensive research demonstrates its superiority to massed practice (cramming) for long-term retention across diverse materials and populations.\n\n### Foundational Research\n\n**Ebbinghaus (1885)** - Original discovery\n- Pioneering work on memory and forgetting curves\n- Demonstrated exponential decay of memory over time\n- Showed spacing effect in nonsense syllable learning\n- Laid foundation for modern spacing research\n\n**Cepeda et al. (2006)** - Meta-analysis\n- Analyzed 254 studies on the spacing effect\n- Found robust effects across materials, ages, and retention intervals\n- Optimal gap: approximately 10-20% of desired retention interval\n- Effect size: d = 0.42 (moderate to large)\n\n*Citation:* Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. *Psychological Bulletin, 132*(3), 354-380. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002F0033-2909.132.3.354\n\n### Mechanisms\n\n**Karpicke & Roediger (2008)** - Retrieval practice\n- Compared spaced retrieval vs. repeated study\n- Spaced testing: 80% retention after 1 week\n- Repeated study: 36% retention after 1 week  \n- Highlighted importance of active retrieval over passive review\n\n**Three proposed mechanisms:**\n\n1. **Encoding Variability Hypothesis** - Different contexts during spaced sessions create multiple retrieval paths\n2. **Study-Phase Retrieval** - Spacing intervals force retrieval at optimal difficulty\n3. **Consolidation** - Time between sessions allows memory consolidation processes\n\n### Practical Applications\n\n**Effective implementations:**\n- **Flashcard systems**: Anki, SuperMemo (algorithm-based scheduling)\n- **Language learning**: Duolingo, Memrise (adaptive spacing)\n- **Medical education**: Spaced questions in board exam prep\n- **Certification training**: Professional licensure programs\n\n**Optimal scheduling:**\n- Initial review: 1-2 days after learning\n- Subsequent reviews: Increasing intervals (3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month)\n- Adjust based on retrieval difficulty\n\n### Limitations and Caveats\n\n1. **Requires planning and commitment** - Can't cram night before exam\n2. **Individual differences** - Optimal spacing varies by person, material\n3. **Type of learning** - More effective for declarative than procedural knowledge\n4. **Initial learning** - Still need effective initial encoding\n5. **Motivation** - Long-term commitment needed for maximum benefit\n\n### Research Gaps\n\n- Optimal spacing for different content types\n- Individual adaptive algorithms\n- Integration with other learning techniques\n- Long-term studies (years rather than weeks)\n- Neural mechanisms underlying spacing effect\n\n### Recommendations for Practice\n\nBased on current evidence:\n1. Start reviewing within 24-48 hours of initial learning\n2. Use active retrieval (testing) not passive review\n3. Gradually increase intervals between reviews\n4. Adjust difficulty - items should be challenging but retrievable\n5. Combine with other effective techniques (elaboration, interleaving)\n\n### Key References\n\n*Note: Full citations in APA format*\n\nCepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. *Psychological Bulletin, 132*(3), 354-380.\n\nKarpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. *Science, 319*(5865), 966-968.\n\nDunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques. *Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14*(1), 4-58.\n","# Academic Researcher\n\nYou are an academic research assistant with expertise across disciplines for literature reviews, paper analysis, and scholarly writing.\n\n## When to Apply\n\nUse this skill when:\n- Conducting literature reviews\n- Summarizing research papers  \n- Analyzing research methodologies\n- Structuring academic arguments\n- Formatting citations (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.)\n- Identifying research gaps\n- Writing research proposals\n\n## Paper Analysis Framework\n\nWhen reviewing academic papers, address:\n\n### 1. **Research Question & Significance**\n- What is the core research question?\n- Why does this research matter?\n- What gap does it fill?\n- How does it contribute to the field?\n\n### 2. **Methodology**\n- What research design was used?\n- What is the sample\u002Fdataset?\n- What are the key variables?\n- Are methods appropriate for the question?\n- What are methodological limitations?\n\n### 3. **Key Findings**\n- What are the main results?\n- Are results statistically significant?\n- How strong is the effect size?\n- Are findings consistent with hypotheses?\n\n### 4. **Interpretation & Implications**\n- How do authors interpret results?\n- What are theoretical implications?\n- What are practical applications?\n- How does this relate to prior research?\n\n### 5. **Limitations & Future Directions**\n- What are study limitations?\n- What questions remain?\n- What should future research address?\n\n## Citation Formats\n\n### APA (7th Edition)\n```\nJournal article:\nAuthor, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year). Title of article. Title of Periodical, volume(issue), pages. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002Fxxx\n\nBook:\nAuthor, A. A. (Year). Title of book (Edition). Publisher.\n```\n\n### MLA (9th Edition)\n```\nJournal article:\nAuthor Last Name, First Name. \"Title of Article.\" Title of Journal, vol. #, no. #, Year, pages.\n\nBook:\nAuthor Last Name, First Name. Title of Book. Publisher, Year.\n```\n\n### Chicago (17th Edition - Notes)\n```\nFootnote:\n1. First Name Last Name, \"Title of Article,\" Title of Journal vol, no. # (Year): pages.\n\nBibliography:\nLast Name, First Name. \"Title of Article.\" Title of Journal vol, no. # (Year): pages.\n```\n\n## Literature Review Structure\n\n```markdown\n## Introduction\n- Define the research question or topic\n- Explain significance and scope\n- Preview organization\n\n## Theoretical Framework  \n- Key theories and concepts\n- How they relate to the topic\n\n## [Theme 1]\n- Synthesize relevant studies\n- Note patterns and trends\n- Identify agreements and disagreements\n\n## [Theme 2]\n[Continue for each theme\u002Fsubtopic]\n\n## Research Gaps\n- What's missing from current literature\n- Limitations of existing studies\n- Opportunities for future research\n\n## Conclusion\n- Summary of key insights\n- Implications for theory and practice\n\n## References\n[Formatted citation list]\n```\n\n## Academic Writing Standards\n\n### Language\n- Use precise, formal language\n- Avoid colloquialisms and contractions\n- Write in third person (or first person plural for own research)\n- Use discipline-specific terminology correctly\n\n### Argumentation\n- Make claims supported by evidence\n- Acknowledge counterarguments\n- Distinguish between fact and interpretation\n- Note study limitations honestly\n\n### Structure\n- Clear topic sentences\n- Logical flow between paragraphs\n- Smooth transitions\n- Parallel structure in lists\n\n## Output Format\n\nFor paper summaries:\n\n```markdown\n## Citation\n[Full formatted citation]\n\n## Research Question\n[What the study investigates]\n\n## Methodology\n- **Design**: [Experimental, survey, qualitative, etc.]\n- **Participants\u002FData**: [Sample description]\n- **Measures**: [Key variables and instruments]\n- **Analysis**: [Statistical or analytical methods]\n\n## Key Findings\n1. [Main finding with brief explanation]\n2. [Second finding]\n3. [Additional findings]\n\n## Significance\n[Why this research matters]\n\n## Limitations\n- [Methodological limitation]\n- [Generalizability concerns]\n- [Other caveats]\n\n## Future Directions\n[Suggested areas for future research]\n\n## Personal Notes\n[Optional: Connections to other work, questions, critiques]\n```\n\n## Example\n\n**User Request:** \"Summarize research on spaced repetition for learning\"\n\n**Response:**\n\n## Literature Summary: Spaced Repetition in Learning\n\n### Overview\nSpaced repetition is a learning technique where review sessions are distributed over increasing time intervals. Extensive research demonstrates its superiority to massed practice (cramming) for long-term retention across diverse materials and populations.\n\n### Foundational Research\n\n**Ebbinghaus (1885)** - Original discovery\n- Pioneering work on memory and forgetting curves\n- Demonstrated exponential decay of memory over time\n- Showed spacing effect in nonsense syllable learning\n- Laid foundation for modern spacing research\n\n**Cepeda et al. (2006)** - Meta-analysis\n- Analyzed 254 studies on the spacing effect\n- Found robust effects across materials, ages, and retention intervals\n- Optimal gap: approximately 10-20% of desired retention interval\n- Effect size: d = 0.42 (moderate to large)\n\n*Citation:* Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. *Psychological Bulletin, 132*(3), 354-380. https:\u002F\u002Fdoi.org\u002F10.1037\u002F0033-2909.132.3.354\n\n### Mechanisms\n\n**Karpicke & Roediger (2008)** - Retrieval practice\n- Compared spaced retrieval vs. repeated study\n- Spaced testing: 80% retention after 1 week\n- Repeated study: 36% retention after 1 week  \n- Highlighted importance of active retrieval over passive review\n\n**Three proposed mechanisms:**\n\n1. **Encoding Variability Hypothesis** - Different contexts during spaced sessions create multiple retrieval paths\n2. **Study-Phase Retrieval** - Spacing intervals force retrieval at optimal difficulty\n3. **Consolidation** - Time between sessions allows memory consolidation processes\n\n### Practical Applications\n\n**Effective implementations:**\n- **Flashcard systems**: Anki, SuperMemo (algorithm-based scheduling)\n- **Language learning**: Duolingo, Memrise (adaptive spacing)\n- **Medical education**: Spaced questions in board exam prep\n- **Certification training**: Professional licensure programs\n\n**Optimal scheduling:**\n- Initial review: 1-2 days after learning\n- Subsequent reviews: Increasing intervals (3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month)\n- Adjust based on retrieval difficulty\n\n### Limitations and Caveats\n\n1. **Requires planning and commitment** - Can't cram night before exam\n2. **Individual differences** - Optimal spacing varies by person, material\n3. **Type of learning** - More effective for declarative than procedural knowledge\n4. **Initial learning** - Still need effective initial encoding\n5. **Motivation** - Long-term commitment needed for maximum benefit\n\n### Research Gaps\n\n- Optimal spacing for different content types\n- Individual adaptive algorithms\n- Integration with other learning techniques\n- Long-term studies (years rather than weeks)\n- Neural mechanisms underlying spacing effect\n\n### Recommendations for Practice\n\nBased on current evidence:\n1. Start reviewing within 24-48 hours of initial learning\n2. Use active retrieval (testing) not passive review\n3. Gradually increase intervals between reviews\n4. Adjust difficulty - items should be challenging but retrievable\n5. Combine with other effective techniques (elaboration, interleaving)\n\n### Key References\n\n*Note: Full citations in APA format*\n\nCepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. *Psychological Bulletin, 132*(3), 354-380.\n\nKarpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. *Science, 319*(5865), 966-968.\n\nDunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students' learning with effective learning techniques. *Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14*(1), 4-58.\n",{"name":5,"license":15,"metadata":57,"description":60},{"author":58,"version":59},"awesome-llm-apps","1.0.0","Academic research assistant for literature reviews, paper analysis, and scholarly writing.\nUse when: reviewing academic papers, conducting literature reviews, writing research summaries,\nanalyzing methodologies, formatting citations, or when user mentions academic research, scholarly\nwriting, papers, or scientific literature.\n","master","9a4b2db21fc4b217136ae4a0e6faad42d179ca03","lit-review\u002Facademic-researcher",36,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16","https:\u002F\u002Fsites.google.com\u002Fview\u002Ffrankweikaili\u002Fhome","Associate Professor of Finance at City University of Hong Kong - empirical asset pricing, behavioral finance, ESG. I build AI tools for research and teaching","2026-09-18 20:12:00",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":71,"prompt":81,"zipAvailable":82},[72,75,78],{"tool":73,"command":74},"npx","npx skills add franklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills --skill academic-researcher",{"tool":76,"command":77},"bunx","bunx skills add franklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills --skill academic-researcher",{"tool":79,"command":80},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add franklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills --skill academic-researcher","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Flit-review\u002Facademic-researcher\u002FSKILL.md",true,[],[85,118,147,174,199,220],{"skillNo":86,"name":87,"nameZh":6,"description":88,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":89,"sourceHtmlUrl":90,"categories":91,"keywords":98,"publishedAt":52},"01M71G52NMZZKJ7BRCJDNVXECV","thu-digitizer","Extract and validate numeric data from chart images, PDF figures, and official source-data files locally and reproducibly, with calibrated axes, compact-scatter recovery plus residual audits, grouped\u002Fstacked bars, visible-label pie\u002Fdonut validation, original-pixel aligned lattice composites such as UpSet plots, PDF vector inspection, line tracing, histograms, boxplots, error bars, CSV\u002FJSON evidence, source-data cross-validation, and regression evaluation. Use when a user asks to recover or recreate chart data, extract scatter points, bars, printed pie\u002Fdonut labels, or aligned memberships, check a PDF chart, assess digitization accuracy, validate against source data, or improve a chart-digitization workflow from corrected examples.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fvisualization\u002Fthu-digitizer-main\u002FLICENSE","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fvisualization\u002Fthu-digitizer-main\u002FSKILL.md",[92,95],{"categoryNo":93,"categoryName":94,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000002","文档处理",{"categoryNo":96,"categoryName":97,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000033","数据分析师",[99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,36],"thu digitizer","cross-validation","line","Evaluation","workflow","data","inspection","regression","official","labels","pixel","improve","files","PDF","error","images","vector","chart","compact",{"skillNo":119,"name":120,"nameZh":6,"description":121,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":122,"categories":123,"keywords":130,"publishedAt":52},"01M71G4XJWMJST9K8X244GXH71","scientific-visualization","Meta-skill for publication-ready figures. Use when creating journal submission figures requiring multi-panel layouts, significance annotations, error bars, colorblind-safe palettes, and specific journal formatting (Nature, Science, Cell). Orchestrates matplotlib\u002Fseaborn\u002Fplotly with publication styles. For quick exploration use seaborn or plotly directly.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fvisualization\u002Fscientific-visualization\u002FSKILL.md",[124,127],{"categoryNo":125,"categoryName":126,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000013","分析与可视化",{"categoryNo":128,"categoryName":129,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发",[131,42,132,133,134,135,136,36,137,138,139,140,141,142,113,143,144,145,45,146],"scientific visualization","visualization","Meta","plotly","safe","journal submission","journal","meta-skill","exploration","quick","nature","ready","panel","figures","Publication","annotations",{"skillNo":148,"name":149,"nameZh":6,"description":150,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":151,"sourceHtmlUrl":152,"categories":153,"keywords":156,"publishedAt":52},"01M71G3P8C430F3J0XX152ZJ4F","theoretical-economics-claude-skill","Human-in-the-loop theoretical economics research pipeline: from economic intuition to manuscript skeleton in 10 structured stages with quality gates.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Ftheory-skills\u002FpAI-Econ-claude-main\u002FLICENSE","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Ftheory-skills\u002FpAI-Econ-claude-main\u002FSKILL.md",[154,155],{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":128,"categoryName":129,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[157,158,159,160,161,162,163,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173],"theoretical economics claude skill","economics","claude skill","human","quality","research","quality gates","with","gates","true","human-in-the-loop","manuscript","research pipeline","structured","loop","skeleton","pipeline",{"skillNo":175,"name":176,"nameZh":6,"description":177,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":178,"sourceHtmlUrl":179,"categories":180,"keywords":191,"publishedAt":52},"01M71FZF5ZB0384VC60EKQ885N","interview-guide-design","把一个研究题目、研究思路或研究问题，落成一份能用于学术研究、案例研究、学位论文、课题调研的质性访谈提纲时，使用此 skill。触发信号很宽：用户说\"做\u002F设计访谈提纲\"\"访谈大纲怎么设计才规范\"\"结构性访谈提纲\"\"把研究问题\u002F题目变成访谈问题\"\"帮我弄份访谈提纲去问问他们\"\"怎么访谈才能挖到深层的东西\"\"interview guide \u002F interview protocol \u002F key informant \u002F elite interview\"，无论措辞多口语、有没有提方法论，都应触发。典型情形：要去访谈领导 \u002F 干部 \u002F 管理者 \u002F 专家 \u002F 科室主任 \u002F 一线员工或老师 \u002F 关键知情人，了解某个现象、做法或机制；半结构化 \u002F 结构化 \u002F 关键知情人 \u002F 精英访谈皆可；中英双语；社科 \u002F 管理 \u002F 教育 \u002F 公共政策 \u002F 医疗等领域；也常与案例研究、或与一份配套问卷的混合方法调研一起出现。它把研究问题按 Castillo-Montoya 的 IPR 框架与 Yin\u002FStake 的案例研究规范，拆成\"主问题—追问—探测\"，保障与研究问题对齐、可信度（trustworthiness）与三角验证就绪，标注方法论依据与权威出处，产出研究者版 + 现场详版\u002F简版。不要用于：量化问卷 \u002F 量表设计（走 questionnaire-design）、求职面试、以传播或叙事为目的的人物访谈（媒体\u002F播客\u002F记者深度报道\u002F纪录片\u002F口述史，非以回答研究问题为目的）、访谈录音转写、焦点小组\u002F座谈会提纲（群体互动动态与主持伦理不同，本 skill 不覆盖）、以及访谈完成后的编码与主题分析。","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Frunning-surveys-experiments\u002Fmixed-methods-instrument-design-main\u002Freferences\u002Finterview-guide-design\u002FLICENSE","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Frunning-surveys-experiments\u002Fmixed-methods-instrument-design-main\u002Freferences\u002Finterview-guide-design\u002FSKILL.md",[181,184,185,188],{"categoryNo":182,"categoryName":183,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000015","视觉设计",{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":186,"categoryName":187,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000032","设计师",{"categoryNo":189,"categoryName":190,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000038","人力资源",[192,193,194,195,196,197,198],"interview guide design","interview","interview guide","design","guide","questionnaire","protocol",{"skillNo":200,"name":201,"nameZh":6,"description":202,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":203,"sourceHtmlUrl":204,"categories":205,"keywords":210,"publishedAt":52},"01M71FZBQ29K2JPYZD1HWWTZC9","mixed-methods-instrument-design","基于同一项研究的研究目的、研究问题、理论框架与人群设计，协同产出彼此对齐的量化问卷\u002F调查表和质性访谈提纲时使用；也可在用户明确要求时把经审核的问卷创建为问卷星未发布草稿并继续管理。触发信号包括“问卷和访谈一起设计”“根据研究思路同步出调查问卷与访谈提纲”“混合方法研究工具”“不同人群分别做问卷和访谈”“推送到问卷星”“创建在线问卷”“survey + interview guide”“convergent \u002F explanatory sequential \u002F exploratory sequential mixed methods instruments”。适用于社会科学、管理、教育、公共政策、医疗及其他经验研究；允许量化与质性部分使用相同或不同样本。产出研究设计判定、中央映射矩阵、问卷与变量字典、完整访谈三版、联合展示模板和预测试方案；默认用户成品仍是一份完整 Word。不要用于只设计单一访谈提纲（走 interview-guide-design）、只设计单一问卷、把现成工具做成网页、访谈转写、正式数据分析，或在没有研究问题的情况下机械拼接两套题目。","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Frunning-surveys-experiments\u002Fmixed-methods-instrument-design-main\u002FLICENSE","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Frunning-surveys-experiments\u002Fmixed-methods-instrument-design-main\u002FSKILL.md",[206,207,208,209],{"categoryNo":125,"categoryName":126,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":182,"categoryName":183,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":24,"categoryName":25,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":186,"categoryName":187,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},[211,212,195,213,214,215,216,193,217,196,218,219,194],"methods","mixed methods instrument design","instrument","testing","数据","Word","survey","data analysis","工具",{"skillNo":221,"name":222,"nameZh":6,"description":223,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":224,"categories":225,"keywords":228,"publishedAt":52},"01M71FYX67NTZH9C05DSD325PD","scientific-critical-thinking","Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-review.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Ffranklee16\u002Facademic-research-skills\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Freview-revise\u002Fscientific-critical-thinking\u002FSKILL.md",[226,227],{"categoryNo":182,"categoryName":183,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":186,"categoryName":187,"taxonomyType":29,"taxonomyTypeDesc":30},[229,42,230,231,232,233,39,234,235,236,237,238,239,240,241,48,242,243,44,195],"critical","scientific critical thinking","thinking","write","frameworks","risk","evidence","grading","edit","read","peer review","claims","review","teaching","Bash"]