Time window (last 12 months / last 3 years / last 5 years / custom)
Industrial AI emphasis (predictive maintenance / intelligent scheduling / industrial anomaly detection / smart manufacturing and process optimization / CPS and edge AI / robotics crossover)
If the user does not choose, default to
last 3 years
and the subdomain implied by their prompt.
Intake Resolution Rules
Resolve as many intake fields as possible from the user prompt before asking follow-up questions.
If all four intake fields are already explicit or safely inferable, do not restate them as questions; lock them, announce the locked choices, and proceed.
If some intake fields are missing, ask only for the missing fields in one compact follow-up block rather than re-asking the full questionnaire.
If the user asks for the "latest", "recent", "current", or "today's" work without a window, default to
last 12 months
and report the absolute year span you used in the final scope note.
If the topic is clearly outside Industrial AI scope, stop before search, name the boundary, and offer the closest supported framing instead of forcing a bad search.
If the user explicitly says "stop after outline" or another survey checkpoint, honor that checkpoint and do not advance to the next survey phase automatically.
Required Inputs
A concrete Industrial AI topic or question.
User choices for report language, deliverable mode, time window, and domain emphasis.
Optional preferences on peer-reviewed-only filtering, benchmarks vs deployment evidence, or desired output format.
If any intake item is missing, ask only for the unresolved items from
references/question-flow.md
before you search.
Source Strategy
Read these files before searching:
references/source-priority.md
references/venue-map.md
Primary sources:
arXiv:
eess.SY
,
cs.AI
IEEE and automation anchors:
T-ASE
,
CASE
Supporting crossover sources:
arXiv:
cs.RO
,
cs.LG
IEEE robotics venues:
ICRA
,
IROS
,
RA-L
,
T-RO
Adjacent industrial and control venues listed in
references/venue-map.md
When the user asks for the latest work, prefer:
arXiv recent streams for rapid updates
top IEEE and automation venues for stronger publication filtering
secondary crossover venues only when they materially improve coverage
Workflow
Phase 1. Scope
Rewrite the request as a precise Industrial AI research objective.
Lock the report language, deliverable mode, time window, and domain emphasis.
State explicit in-scope and out-of-scope boundaries.
Phase 2. Search Plan
Build venue buckets and keyword groups from
references/source-priority.md
.
Separate primary sources from secondary crossover sources.
State the recency policy and any seminal-paper exceptions.
Phase 3. Source Collection
Gather papers from the prioritized source buckets.
Prefer official venue pages, arXiv recent listings, IEEE Xplore landing pages, and publisher or conference pages.
Record why each paper was included.
Phase 4. Verification and Triage
Check venue quality, publication type, year, and relevance.
Remove weak matches, duplicates, and generic blog-style sources.
Mark unreviewed preprints as preprints.
Phase 5. Synthesis
Cluster the shortlisted papers by problem, method, dataset, deployment setting, and evaluation style.
Surface trends, gaps, contradictions, and under-explored opportunities.
When contradictions exist, state them before drawing any research-gap conclusion.
Run a contrarian pass: what would challenge the dominant conclusion?
Phase 6. Report Assembly
Use the stable report structure from
references/report-modes.md
.
Every final report must include:
search scope
source buckets by venue
shortlisted papers
synthesis of trends and gaps
recommended next reading or next experiments
Survey-Draft Workflow (Phases S1–S4)
When the user selects
survey-draft
, Phases 1–4 (Scope, Search Plan, Source Collection, Verification) execute as normal, then S1–S4 replace the original Phases 5–6.
Phase S1. Outline Building
Read
references/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.md
.
Extract a taxonomy from the verified literature.
Build the section skeleton as structured YAML.
Present the outline to the user for approval.
CHECKPOINT
do not enter S2 until the user approves the outline.
Phase S2. Evidence Pack Assembly
Read
references/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.md
.
Assemble an evidence pack for every H3 subsection.
Lock the citation scope for each subsection.
Produce structured evidence bundles (no prose).
Phase S3. Section-by-Section Writing
Read
references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.md
.
Draft each H3 independently, grounded in its evidence pack.
Run the self-check gate on every H3 (depth, citation scope, tone).
Produce one Markdown file per H2 section.
Phase S4. Merge and Quality Gate
Read
references/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.md
.
Merge all section drafts into a single document.
Run cross-section consistency checks.
Apply the final quality checklist.
If the user requested LaTeX output, delegate to
latex-paper-en
.
Deliverable Modes
Read
references/report-modes.md
and follow the selected mode exactly.
research-brief
short, decision-ready overview
literature-map
thematic map across methods and subproblems
venue-ranked survey
grouped by source quality and venue tier
research-gap memo
open problems, design space, and next-step opportunities
survey-draft
taxonomy-driven survey manuscript with outline-first writing and optional LaTeX export
Output Contract
State the locked intake choices and any defaults you applied before synthesis.
Include a short search-method note: venue buckets used, recency policy, and any fallback or broadening step you had to apply.
Distinguish verified evidence from inference in every deliverable.
Label preprints explicitly as preprints.
For non-survey modes, produce a structured report that includes: scope, source buckets, shortlisted papers, synthesis, and next reading or next experiments.
For
survey-draft
, keep stage outputs format-specific:
S1: YAML outline only
S2: evidence packs or tables only
S3: section Markdown drafts grounded in the evidence packs
S4: merged Markdown survey with cross-section consistency notes
Survey prose should prefer
consensus -> disagreement -> limitations -> gap
over paper-by-paper narration.
If sources are sparse, inaccessible, or off-scope, say so directly and report the exact fallback you used.
Module Router
Module
Use when
Primary action
Read next
research
User selects any of the 4 report modes
Execute Phase 1–6 workflow
references/report-modes.md
survey-outline
User selects survey-draft (Phase S1)
Build taxonomy and section skeleton
references/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.md
survey-evidence
Outline approved by user (Phase S2)
Assemble per-H3 evidence packs
references/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.md
survey-write
Evidence packs complete (Phase S3)
Draft prose per H3
references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.md
survey-merge
All sections complete (Phase S4)
Merge, quality gate, optional LaTeX handoff
references/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.md
Quality Bar
Read
references/quality-checklist.md
before finalizing.
Non-negotiable standards:
no unsupported claims
no venue-blind source mixing
no hiding contradictions
no synthesized report before intake questions are answered
no generic "latest research says" language without source-backed evidence
Error Handling
Zero results
Broaden keywords, relax the time window by one tier, and try adjacent venues. If still empty, report the negative result with the exact queries attempted.
Off-subdomain topic
State that the topic falls outside Industrial AI scope, suggest the closest supported subdomain, and ask the user whether to proceed or abort.
Inaccessible databases
Note which sources were unreachable, proceed with available sources, and flag the gap in the final report.
Too few papers (<5 shortlisted)
Lower the time window threshold, include Tier 2/3 venues, and explicitly note the thin evidence base in the synthesis.
Reference Map
File
Phase
When to read
references/question-flow.md
Intake
Before asking the user any questions
references/source-priority.md
Search Plan
Before building venue buckets
references/venue-map.md
Search Plan
Before selecting specific venues
references/report-modes.md
Report Assembly
Before structuring the final output
references/quality-checklist.md
Report Assembly
Before finalizing the report
references/modules/SURVEY_OUTLINE.md
Survey S1
When building the survey outline
references/modules/SURVEY_EVIDENCE.md
Survey S2
When assembling evidence packs
references/modules/SURVEY_WRITER.md
Survey S3
When drafting survey sections
references/modules/SURVEY_MERGE.md
Survey S4
When merging and running quality gate
references/SURVEY_WRITING_GUIDE.md
Survey S1–S4
Survey writing philosophy reference
Examples
examples/predictive-maintenance.md
examples/intelligent-scheduling.md
examples/industrial-anomaly-detection.md
examples/survey-predictive-maintenance.md
Example Requests
“Research recent predictive maintenance papers from the last 3 years and return a research-brief.”
“Compare industrial anomaly detection papers across arXiv and IEEE automation venues, and show contradictions in evaluation setups.”
“Draft a survey on intelligent scheduling for researchers new to the subfield, but stop after the YAML outline for approval.”
“My topic is warehouse picking robotics. If that is outside scope, tell me the closest supported Industrial AI framing and proceed only with that.”
Boundaries
This v1 skill does not implement:
systematic review mode
meta-analysis
IRB-heavy or clinical ethics branches
standalone automation scripts
If the user needs those, state the boundary and continue with the closest supported research mode.
Installs
271
Repository
bahayonghang/ac…g-skills
GitHub Stars
181
First Seen
Mar 14, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust Hub
Pass
Socket
Pass
Snyk
Warn