Agent skill · Security

paper-claim-audit

Zero-context verification that every number, comparison, and scope claim in the paper matches raw result files. Uses a fresh cross-model reviewer with NO prior context to prevent confirmation bias. Use when user says \"审查论文数据\", \"check paper claims\", \"verify numbers\", \"论文数字核对\", or before submission to ensure paper-to-evidence fidelity.

majiayu000github.com/majiayu000GitHub ↗
claude-codecan modify filesMIT
Install
npx skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill paper-claim-audit --agent claude-code

Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.

Facts
Files in the skill folder: 2
SKILL.md size: 14 KB
Bundled scripts: none
Allowed tools: Bash(*)ReadWriteEditGrepGlobmcp__codex__codex
Path: skills/analysis/paper-claim-audit/SKILL.md
Open the folder on GitHub →
Where it comes from
Stars: 534
Language: HTML

Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.

From the SKILL.md

# Paper Claim Audit: Zero-Context Evidence Verification > 🔒 **Do not wrap this skill in `/loop`, `/schedule`, or `CronCreate`.** It is > verdict-bearing — it judges paper-to-evidence fidelity with a deliberately > zero-context fresh reviewer. Re-firing that verdict on a wall-clock timer adds > no new signal (it changes only when the *paper or results* change). Schedule > the *external wait that precedes it* — paper draft ready → then audit > **once**. See > [`shared-references/external-cadence.md`](../shared-references/external-cadence.md). Verify that every claim in the paper matches raw evidence for: **$ARGUMENTS** ## Why This Exists The executor writes experiments AND writes the paper. It "knows" what the results should be. This creates confirmation bias: - Rounding 84.7% up to 85.3% - Reporting best seed instead of average - Citing metrics from a different experiment config - Claiming "improves by 15%" when the delta is actually 12.8% A **fresh reviewer with zero prior context** catches these because it has no expectations — it just compares paper text vs raw files. ## How This Differs From Other Audit Skills | Skill | Question it answers | |-------|-------------------| | `/ex

What's inside
Steps it walks through
  1. Why This Exists
  2. How This Differs From Other Audit Skills
  3. Core Principle
  4. Workflow
  5. Step 1: Collect Files (Executor — Claude)
  6. Step 2: Fresh Reviewer Audit (GPT-5.5 — NEW thread, no reply)
  7. Step 3: Write Report (Executor — Claude)
  8. Step 4: Print Summary
  9. When to Run
  10. Integration with Other Skills
  11. Read by /auto-paper-improvement-loop (if exists)
  12. Advisory, Never Blocking
  13. Render HTML view (auto, when RENDERHTML = true, default)
  14. Key Rules
Ships with 1 file
  • metadata.json
More from claude-skill-registry
All skills →
About this skill
What does the paper-claim-audit skill do?

Zero-context verification that every number, comparison, and scope claim in the paper matches raw result files. Uses a fresh cross-model reviewer with NO prior context to prevent confirmation bias. Use when user says \"审查论文数据\", \"check paper claims\", \"verify numbers\", \"论文数字核对\", or before submission to ensure paper-to-evidence fidelity.

How do I install it?

Run `npx skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill paper-claim-audit --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.

Where does this skill come from?

From majiayu000/claude-skill-registry, a repository with 534 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.

Is a popular skill a good skill?

Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.

Keep going