agentsclimarketplace

Paper writing bench

Skill woodfishhhh/EZ_math_model/skills/ez-math-model/external/paper-orchestra/skills/paper-writing-bench

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".From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add woodfishhhh/EZ_math_model --skill paper-writing-bench

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

SKILL.md

5.5 KB, ~1.2k tokens by cl100k_base, 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 results
  • idea.md (Dense variant) — detailed technical proposal with LaTeX equations and variable definitions, but still no experimental results
  • experimental_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 variant
  • bench/<paper_id>/idea_dense.md — Dense variant
  • bench/<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:

  1. 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.
  2. Drop the chosen idea.md, plus experimental_log.md, plus a template.tex for the target conference, plus a conference_guidelines.md, into a paper-orchestra workspace.
  3. Run the pipeline.
  4. 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, sizes
  • references/sparse-idea-prompt.md — verbatim from App. F.2
  • references/dense-idea-prompt.md — verbatim from App. F.2
  • references/experimental-log-prompt.md — verbatim from App. F.2

What ships with it: 4 files

13.4 KB alongside SKILL.md

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most docs writing skills give in ~1.2k tokens

Counted across 1,637 of the 3,044 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07

  • Announce the skill at startin 54 of 1637, across 26 files
  • Convert legacy doc files before editingin 45 of 1637, across 7 files
  • Predict questions readers might askin 42 of 1637, across 4 files
  • Generate clarifying questions for initial contextin 42 of 1637, across 3 files
  • Create document scaffold with placeholder textin 42 of 1637, across 3 files
  • Brainstorm content options for each sectionin 42 of 1637, across 3 files
  • Test the document with a fresh context-less instancein 42 of 1637, across 3 files
  • Include exact file paths in every taskin 42 of 1637, across 15 files
  • Ask interview questions one at a timein 42 of 1637, across 27 files
  • Apply surgical edits during refinementin 41 of 1637, across 2 files
  • Offer structured workflow or freeformin 40 of 1637, across 1 file
  • Ask for document meta-contextin 40 of 1637, across 2 files

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 326,851. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.