🇺🇸English
Paper Self-Review
A systematic paper quality checking tool that helps researchers conduct comprehensive self-review before submission.
Core Features
1. Structure Review
Check whether all sections of the paper are complete and conform to academic standards:
- Does the Abstract include problem, method, results, and contributions?
- Does the Introduction clearly articulate research motivation and background?
- Is the Method detailed enough to be reproducible?
- Do the Results sufficiently support the conclusions?
- Does the Discussion address limitations and future work?
2. Logic Consistency Check
Verify the logical coherence of the paper:
- Do research questions match the methodology?
- Does the experimental design support the research hypotheses?
- Are result interpretations reasonable?
- Are conclusions supported by evidence?
3. Citation Completeness
Check the completeness and accuracy of citations:
- Are all citations present in the references?
- Is the reference format consistent?
- Are key related works cited?
- Do citations accurately reflect the original content?
4. Figure/Table Quality
Evaluate the quality and effectiveness of figures and tables:
- Do all figures/tables have clear titles and captions?
- Do figures/tables support the text narrative?
- Are figures/tables clear and readable?
- Do formats comply with journal/conference requirements?
5. Writing Clarity
Check writing clarity and readability:
- Is the language concise and clear?
- Is technical terminology used appropriately?
- Are sentence structures clear?
- Is paragraph organization logical?
Quality Checklist
Use this checklist for systematic paper self-review:
Paper Quality Checklist:
- [ ] Abstract includes problem, method, results, contributions
- [ ] Introduction clearly states research motivation
- [ ] Method is reproducible
- [ ] Results support conclusions
- [ ] Discussion addresses limitations
- [ ] All figures/tables have captions
- [ ] Citations are complete and accurate
When to Use
Use this skill in the following scenarios:
- Pre-submission check - Final review before submitting to a journal or conference
- After first draft - Systematic review after completing the first draft
- Before advisor review - Self-check before requesting advisor feedback to improve quality
- Post-revision verification - After revising based on reviewer comments, verify all issues are addressed
- Collaborator review - Quality check before sending to collaborators
Review Process
Follow these steps for systematic paper review:
Step 1: Structure Review
Start with the overall structure, checking if all sections are complete and logically coherent.
Step 2: Content Review
Dive into each section, checking content accuracy and completeness.
Step 3: Citation Check
Verify the completeness and accuracy of all citations.
Step 4: Figure/Table Review
Check the quality and captions of all figures and tables.
Step 5: Writing Quality
Review language expression and writing clarity.
Step 6: Final Checklist
Use the quality checklist for final verification.
Best Practices
Review Timing
- Spaced review - Wait 1-2 days after completing the draft before reviewing to maintain objectivity
- Multiple rounds - Conduct multiple review rounds, focusing on different aspects each time
- Print review - Print a hard copy for review; issues are easier to spot on paper
Review Techniques
- Reverse reading - Read from conclusion backwards to check logical coherence
- Read aloud - Reading the paper aloud helps identify language issues
- Reviewer perspective - Assume you are a reviewer and read critically
Common Issues
- Abstract too brief or too verbose
- Introduction lacks clear research question statement
- Method lacks sufficient detail for reproduction
- Results lack statistical significance tests
- Discussion doesn't address research limitations
- Figures/tables lack clear titles and captions
- Inconsistent citation formatting
Summary
The Paper Self-Review skill provides a systematic paper quality checking process, helping researchers identify and resolve issues before submission, improving paper quality and acceptance rates.
Reference Files
Load only what is needed:
references/SECTION-CHECKLIST.md - section-by-section review questionsreferences/FINAL-VERDICT.md - how to summarize submission readiness and blocking issuesexamples/example-self-review.md - example review output
Weekly Installs
76
Repository
galaxy-dawn/cla…-scholar
GitHub Stars
2.7K
First Seen
Feb 12, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykPass
Installed on
codex75
opencode72
kimi-cli71
amp71
github-copilot71
gemini-cli71
