Use this skill when asked to review, critique, or analyze an AI/ML research paper. Provides a structured evaluation covering contributions, methodology, experimental validity, and limitations.
npx claudepluginhub aviskaar/open-org --plugin research-paper-review# Research Paper Review Perform a rigorous, structured review of an AI/ML research paper. ## Review Structure Always organize the review under these sections: ### 1. Summary (2–3 sentences) State the paper's core claim, the approach taken, and the key result. No jargon — write so that a senior researcher in an adjacent field can follow. ### 2. Contributions List the paper's stated and actual contributions. Note if the framing overstates novelty. ### 3. Methodology - Is the method described with enough detail to reproduce? - Are design choices justified or arbitrary? - Are there ablati...
/SKILLGuides implementation of defense-in-depth security architectures, compliance (SOC2, ISO27001, GDPR, HIPAA), threat modeling, risk assessments, SecOps, incident response, and SDLC security integration.
/SKILLEvaluates LLMs on 60+ benchmarks (MMLU, HumanEval, GSM8K) using lm-eval harness. Provides CLI commands for HuggingFace/vLLM models, task lists, and evaluation checklists.
/SKILLApplies systematic debugging strategies to track down bugs, performance issues, and unexpected behavior using checklists, scientific method, and testing techniques.
/SKILLSummarizes content from URLs, local files, podcasts, and YouTube videos. Extracts transcripts with --extract-only flag. Supports AI models, lengths, and JSON output.
/SKILLRuns `yarn extract-errors` on React project to detect new error messages needing codes, reports them, and verifies existing codes are up to date.
/SKILLManages major dependency upgrades via compatibility analysis, staged rollouts with npm/yarn, and testing for frameworks like React.
Perform a rigorous, structured review of an AI/ML research paper.
Always organize the review under these sections:
State the paper's core claim, the approach taken, and the key result. No jargon — write so that a senior researcher in an adjacent field can follow.
List the paper's stated and actual contributions. Note if the framing overstates novelty.
Identify limitations the authors acknowledge, then add any they missed. Be specific.
Note whether the paper engages honestly with prior work, including concurrent work.
Rate the paper: Accept / Weak Accept / Borderline / Weak Reject / Reject Give a one-paragraph justification.
Produce the review as markdown with the sections above. Summarize the verdict at the top in a blockquote before the full review body.