feat(skills): add paper-parsing skill
This commit is contained in:
parent
f62129f5d4
commit
5136723d62
140
.opencode/skills/paper-parsing/SKILL.md
Normal file
140
.opencode/skills/paper-parsing/SKILL.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: paper-parsing
|
||||
description: Use when analyzing ML/DL papers to ensure comprehensive extraction of all relevant information
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Paper Parsing Methodology
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Systematic approach to parsing ML/DL papers for replication. Emphasizes **completeness** and **openness** to avoid missing critical details.
|
||||
|
||||
**Announce at start:** "I'm using the paper-parsing skill to ensure comprehensive paper analysis."
|
||||
|
||||
## Core Philosophy
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Completeness over speed**: Better to extract too much than miss something
|
||||
2. **Open-ended discovery**: Papers contain unique insights; don't force into templates
|
||||
3. **Cross-reference**: Information appears in multiple places; cross-check
|
||||
4. **Explicit uncertainty**: Mark unclear items rather than guessing
|
||||
|
||||
## Paper Sections Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
### Abstract
|
||||
- [ ] Core contribution identified
|
||||
- [ ] Key results/numbers extracted
|
||||
- [ ] Problem domain understood
|
||||
|
||||
### Introduction
|
||||
- [ ] Problem motivation clear
|
||||
- [ ] Gap in existing work identified
|
||||
- [ ] Proposed solution summarized
|
||||
- [ ] Claimed contributions listed
|
||||
|
||||
### Related Work
|
||||
- [ ] Key prior methods identified
|
||||
- [ ] Differences from this work noted
|
||||
- [ ] Potential baselines for comparison
|
||||
|
||||
### Method / Approach
|
||||
- [ ] Architecture fully described
|
||||
- [ ] All components identified
|
||||
- [ ] Mathematical formulation complete
|
||||
- [ ] Training procedure detailed
|
||||
- [ ] Loss functions specified
|
||||
- [ ] Hyperparameters listed
|
||||
|
||||
### Experiments
|
||||
- [ ] Datasets listed with sizes
|
||||
- [ ] Evaluation metrics defined
|
||||
- [ ] Baseline comparisons noted
|
||||
- [ ] Ablation studies cataloged
|
||||
- [ ] Key numerical results extracted
|
||||
|
||||
### Appendix / Supplementary
|
||||
- [ ] Additional implementation details
|
||||
- [ ] Extended results
|
||||
- [ ] Proofs or derivations
|
||||
- [ ] Code references
|
||||
|
||||
## Information Extraction Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
### Architecture Details
|
||||
|
||||
Look for:
|
||||
- Layer types and configurations
|
||||
- Activation functions
|
||||
- Normalization methods
|
||||
- Attention mechanisms
|
||||
- Skip connections
|
||||
- Input/output dimensions
|
||||
|
||||
Common locations:
|
||||
- Method section figures
|
||||
- Architecture diagrams
|
||||
- Table of hyperparameters
|
||||
- Appendix implementation details
|
||||
|
||||
### Training Configuration
|
||||
|
||||
| Parameter | Typical Locations |
|
||||
|-----------|-------------------|
|
||||
| Learning rate | Experiments, Appendix |
|
||||
| Batch size | Experiments, Appendix |
|
||||
| Optimizer | Method, Appendix |
|
||||
| Epochs | Experiments |
|
||||
| Hardware | Experiments, Appendix |
|
||||
| Training time | Experiments |
|
||||
|
||||
### Numerical Results
|
||||
|
||||
Extract from:
|
||||
- Main results tables
|
||||
- Comparison figures
|
||||
- Ablation tables
|
||||
- Training curves (approximate values)
|
||||
|
||||
Format as:
|
||||
| Metric | Dataset | Value | Conditions |
|
||||
|--------|---------|-------|------------|
|
||||
| Accuracy | CIFAR-10 | 95.2% | ResNet-50 backbone |
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Omissions to Watch For
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Initialization**: Often in appendix or not mentioned
|
||||
2. **Data augmentation**: May be standard but unspecified
|
||||
3. **Early stopping criteria**: Often implied
|
||||
4. **Evaluation protocol**: Train/val/test split details
|
||||
5. **Random seeds**: Reproducibility details
|
||||
6. **Software versions**: PyTorch, CUDA versions
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Verification
|
||||
|
||||
Before completing analysis:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Coverage check**: Every section reviewed?
|
||||
2. **Consistency check**: Numbers match across sections?
|
||||
3. **Completeness check**: Could someone implement from this?
|
||||
4. **Ambiguity check**: Unclear items marked?
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Quality Markers
|
||||
|
||||
Good analysis:
|
||||
- Specific numbers, not "good performance"
|
||||
- Exact layer configs, not "standard ResNet"
|
||||
- Explicit uncertainty markers
|
||||
- Cross-references between sections
|
||||
|
||||
Poor analysis:
|
||||
- Vague descriptions
|
||||
- Missing hyperparameters
|
||||
- No numerical targets
|
||||
- Assumptions without noting them
|
||||
|
||||
## Red Flags
|
||||
|
||||
If you notice:
|
||||
- "Implementation details in code" → Check GitHub link
|
||||
- "Standard settings" → Look up the standard
|
||||
- "Following [citation]" → May need to read that paper
|
||||
- Inconsistent numbers → Note the discrepancy
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user