04-04-symbol-definition-skill
Standardizes symbol and notation definitions for research papers.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/04-04-symbol-definition-skill && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/15712" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/04-04-symbol-definition-skill && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/04-04-symbol-definition-skill
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Use for the \"Symbol Definition\" step in a NeurIPS paper workflow when you need paragraph output for the Problem Formulation And Preliminaries stage from verified inputs. Best for when refining or drafting the problem formulation and preliminaries portion of a neurips-style paper; when you need a reusable artifact rather than a one-off paragraph rewrite; not for inventing unsupported experiments, citations, proofs, or contributions.Key capabilities
- →Draft the Problem Formulation And Preliminaries section
- →Produce reusable symbol definition modules
- →Ensure explicit boundaries and evidence discipline
- →Maintain factual faithfulness and claim-evidence alignment
- →Suppress overclaiming and ensure reviewer-friendly clarity
How it works
The skill processes verified inputs like a paper blueprint and method notes to produce a symbol definition module for the Problem Formulation And Preliminaries section. It adheres to strict guardrails to ensure factual faithfulness and avoid unsupported statements.
Inputs & outputs
When to use 04-04-symbol-definition-skill
- →Draft problem formulation for research paper
- →Define notation for machine learning paper
- →Create reusable symbol definitions
- →Refine preliminaries section of a paper
About this skill
Symbol Definition
Original id: 04_04_symbol_definition_skill
Section: Problem Formulation And Preliminaries
Layer: section
Category: problem_formulation_and_preliminaries
Produce a reusable symbol definition module for Problem Formulation And Preliminaries within a NeurIPS paper workflow, with explicit boundaries, evidence discipline, and handoff-ready structure.
When To Use
- When refining or drafting the Problem Formulation And Preliminaries portion of a NeurIPS-style paper.
- When you need a reusable artifact rather than a one-off paragraph rewrite.
When Not To Use
- Do not use when required evidence is absent and cannot be clearly marked as missing.
- Do not use as a shortcut for inventing experiments, citations, proof content, or contributions.
Inputs
Required inputs:
paper_blueprint(required): Verified paper-level question, answer, storyline, contributions, and target sections.contribution_list(required): Stable list of contributions already accepted by the authors as in-scope and evidence-backed.claim_evidence_map(required): Claim-to-evidence alignment table used to prevent unsupported statements and novelty inflation.method_notes(required): Verified technical notes covering setting, assumptions, symbols, modules, objectives, and scope limits.
Optional inputs:
terminology_registry(optional): Canonical terms, symbols, and disallowed variants for consistency control.current_draft_context(optional): Existing local draft text or outline to revise, compress, or audit.venue_constraints(optional): Page limit, formatting rules, length pressure, or author preference on tone.
Output Contract
- Output format:
paragraph - Required sections:
objective_interpretation,main_output,risk_flags,handoff_notes - Tone and language:
reviewer-friendly/English - Length guidance: Keep outputs compact, handoff-ready, and easy to embed in a prompt library.
Workflow
- Treat the provided inputs as the only source of truth.
- Produce only the bounded artifact for this skill, not a whole-paper rewrite.
- Preserve contribution names, terminology, and claim boundaries from the shared inputs.
- Make gaps explicit instead of guessing, especially when evidence is incomplete.
- Before finalizing, run the section checks and self-checklist below.
- If you need the full original schema or prompt template, read
references/spec.yaml.
Guardrails
Core hard rules:
- Do not invent experiments, results, contributions, baselines, theoretical conclusions, or citations.
- Maintain factual faithfulness, claim-evidence alignment, terminology consistency, overclaim suppression, and reviewer-friendly clarity.
- If evidence is missing, weak, or indirect, say so explicitly and reduce claim strength rather than filling gaps.
- Prefer bounded, reviewer-safe wording over broad or triumphalist phrasing.
Section-specific checks:
- Output stays within the scope of Problem Formulation And Preliminaries and does not leak unsupported content from other sections.
- Contribution names, task setting, and method references match the global blueprint.
- Claims are phrased at the strength justified by the supplied evidence.
Revision policy:
- Missing required input: Return a gap-marked scaffold and list exactly which missing inputs block a stronger output.
- Unsupported claim: Downgrade or remove the claim, explain the evidence gap, and never patch the gap with invented detail.
- Multiple valid options: Provide 2-3 bounded options with tradeoffs, but keep all options faithful to the same verified facts.
Coordination
Reasoning focus:
- logical coherence.
- evidence grounding.
- novelty positioning.
- wording restraint.
Self-checklist:
- Every main statement is supported by provided facts or explicitly labeled as a gap.
- No wording overstates novelty, empirical coverage, causality, or theory scope.
- Terminology, symbols, and contribution labels match the shared registry and blueprint.
- The output does not conflict with neighboring sections such as abstract, method, experiments, or conclusion.
Upstream skills:
00_01_paper_blueprint_skill00_03_contribution_extractor_skill00_04_claim_evidence_alignment_skill00_06_terminology_notation_registry_skill04_03_assumption_statement_skill
Downstream handoff:
04_05_preliminary_concepts_skill
When not to use it
- →Required evidence is absent and cannot be clearly marked as missing
- →As a shortcut for inventing experiments, citations, proof content, or contributions
Limitations
- →Do not invent experiments, results, contributions, baselines, theoretical conclusions, or citations.
- →Maintain factual faithfulness, claim-evidence alignment, terminology consistency, overclaim suppression, and reviewer-friendly clarity.
- →If evidence is missing, weak, or indirect, say so explicitly and reduce claim strength rather than filling gaps.
How it compares
This skill focuses on generating a specific, bounded artifact for a research paper's preliminaries section, ensuring consistency and evidence-grounding, unlike a general writing assistant.
Compared to similar skills
04-04-symbol-definition-skill side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04-04-symbol-definition-skill (this skill) | 0 | 4mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| scientific-writing | 94 | 2mo | Review | Intermediate |
| content-research-writer | 15 | 10mo | No flags | Beginner |
| research-grants | 6 | 8mo | Review | Advanced |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
You might also like
scientific-writing
K-Dense-AI
Write scientific manuscripts. IMRAD structure, citations (APA/AMA/Vancouver), figures/tables, reporting guidelines (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA), abstracts, for research papers and journal submissions.
content-research-writer
ComposioHQ
Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section. Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership.
research-grants
davila7
Write competitive research proposals for NSF, NIH, DOE, and DARPA. Agency-specific formatting, review criteria, budget preparation, broader impacts, significance statements, innovation narratives, and compliance with submission requirements.
clinical-decision-support
K-Dense-AI
Generate professional clinical decision support (CDS) documents for pharmaceutical and clinical research settings, including patient cohort analyses (biomarker-stratified with outcomes) and treatment recommendation reports (evidence-based guidelines with decision algorithms). Supports GRADE evidence grading, statistical analysis (hazard ratios, survival curves, waterfall plots), biomarker integration, and regulatory compliance. Outputs publication-ready LaTeX/PDF format optimized for drug development, clinical research, and evidence synthesis.
nsfc-research-foundation-writer
huangwb8
为 NSFC 正文"(三)研究基础"写作/重构,并同步编排"工作条件"和"研究风险应对",用证据链证明项目可行、资源条件对位研究内容、风险预案可执行。适用于用户要写/改"研究基础、前期工作、可行性分析、工作条件、平台团队、风险应对"等场景。
arcanea-scene-craft
frankxai
Master scene construction - the building blocks of story. Openings that hook, middles that build, endings that propel. Turn every scene into a compelling unit of narrative.