Paper writing bench
An automated AI research-paper writer based off Google's PaperOrchestra paper's implementation through a skills - benchmark + autoraters using any coding agent (Claude Code, Cursor, Antigravity, Cline, Aider). No API keys, no LLM SDKs.
npx -y skills add Ar9av/PaperOrchestra --skill paper-writing-benchAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Reverse-engineer raw materials (Sparse idea, Dense idea, experimental log) from an existing AI research paper to build a benchmark case for evaluating paper-writing pipelines. Replicates the PaperWritingBench dataset construction procedure from arXiv:2604.05018 §3 / App. C. TRIGGER when the user asks to "build a benchmark case from this paper", "reverse-engineer raw materials", or "evaluate my pipeline against PaperWritingBench".
SKILL.md
5.5 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
PaperWritingBench (§3)
Faithful implementation of the PaperWritingBench dataset construction procedure from PaperOrchestra (Song et al., 2026, arXiv:2604.05018, §3 and App. C, F.2).
The original benchmark contains 200 papers (100 CVPR 2025 + 100 ICLR 2025). For each paper, the authors reverse-engineer the (I, E) tuple by stripping narrative flow from the original PDF using the three prompts in App. F.2. You can use this skill to reverse-engineer your own benchmark cases from any paper PDF.
What this skill does
Given an existing AI research paper (PDF or markdown extract), produce:
idea.md(Sparse variant) — high-level concept note, no math, no experimental resultsidea.md(Dense variant) — detailed technical proposal with LaTeX equations and variable definitions, but still no experimental resultsexperimental_log.md— exhaustive raw experimental setup, numeric data, and qualitative observations, with all narrative references stripped
These three files form a complete (I, E) input pair for the
paper-orchestra pipeline. You can then run the pipeline and compare its
output to the original paper using paper-autoraters.
Inputs
- A paper PDF or extracted markdown text. The paper uses MinerU (Wang et al., 2024) for PDF→markdown extraction; you (the host agent) should use whatever PDF extractor your environment provides.
- For controlled experiments, you may also extract figures separately (PDFFigures 2.0 in the paper).
Outputs
bench/<paper_id>/idea_sparse.md— Sparse variantbench/<paper_id>/idea_dense.md— Dense variantbench/<paper_id>/experimental_log.md— Experimental log
Workflow
For each paper, run three independent LLM calls using the verbatim prompts below:
1. Sparse idea generation
Load references/sparse-idea-prompt.md. Pass the paper text (or
markdown extract) as {paper_content}. The prompt instructs the model to:
- Stop extracting at empirical verification (no Experiments / Results / Comparisons)
- Use first-person future tense ("We propose to explore...")
- Avoid LaTeX math; describe components by function
- Anonymize authors and titles
Output: idea_sparse.md with the four sections (Problem Statement, Core
Hypothesis, Proposed Methodology high-level, Expected Contribution).
2. Dense idea generation
Load references/dense-idea-prompt.md. Same input. The prompt instructs
the model to:
- Preserve mathematical formulations using LaTeX
- Define every variable used in equations
- Include specific architectural choices and dimensions
- Same exclusion zone (no experiments)
Output: idea_dense.md with the four sections (Problem Statement, Core
Hypothesis, Proposed Methodology detailed, Expected Contribution).
3. Experimental log generation
Load references/experimental-log-prompt.md. Same input. The prompt
instructs the model to:
- Use past-tense persona ("We ran...", "The results were...")
- Strip all references to figure/table numbers
- Deconstruct tables into raw numeric data
- Log figure findings as factual observations
- Anonymize authors
Output: experimental_log.md with sections for Setup, Raw Numeric Data,
and Qualitative Observations.
Critical rules from the prompts
These are excerpted from App. F.2. The host agent MUST honor them:
- No citations. None of the three outputs may contain
\cite, reference numbers, or author names from the source paper. - No URLs. Strip all hyperlinks.
- Anonymize. Author identities, affiliations, acknowledgements all removed.
- Self-contained. Each file must make sense without the original paper.
- No experimental leakage in idea files. The Sparse and Dense ideas must stop where empirical verification begins. They describe what will be done, not what was done.
- No table/figure references in experimental log. No "as shown in Table 1", "see Fig. 5". The downstream paper-orchestra pipeline will generate its own figures and tables — the log must not assume any particular ones exist.
- 100% numeric accuracy in experimental log. This becomes the ground truth for the section-writing-agent and content-refinement-agent's hallucination check.
How the bench is used
After producing (idea_sparse.md, idea_dense.md, experimental_log.md) for
a paper:
- Pick a variant (Sparse or Dense) — the paper ablates both, with Dense producing more rigorous methodology and Sparse exercising the system's robustness on under-specified inputs.
- Drop the chosen
idea.md, plusexperimental_log.md, plus atemplate.texfor the target conference, plus aconference_guidelines.md, into a paper-orchestra workspace. - Run the pipeline.
- Compare the generated paper against the original using
paper-autoraters(citation F1, lit review quality, SxS paper quality).
Resources
references/bench-overview.md— the 200-paper bench, venue cutoffs, sizesreferences/sparse-idea-prompt.md— verbatim from App. F.2references/dense-idea-prompt.md— verbatim from App. F.2references/experimental-log-prompt.md— verbatim from App. F.2