Paper2skill Survey Synthesis

When to Use

Apply this skill when you encounter arXiv papers that:

• Provide a comprehensive review of a field with explicit taxonomy or organization scheme (surveys of LLMs, transformers, diffusion models, reinforcement learning)
• Present a new perspective or position on existing research directions (position papers on safety, interpretability, scalability)
• Teach a research methodology through structured walkthrough (tutorials on prompt engineering, training techniques, evaluation)
• Articulate research roadmaps or community consensus on open problems (future of AI, scaling paradigms, unsolved challenges in NLP)
• Compare and contrast multiple approaches to the same problem with decision criteria
• Discuss why certain design choices succeeded or failed across a research lineage

Examples: "A Survey of Large Language Models", "Attention is All You Need" (foundational review sections), "Challenges and Opportunities in Open-Ended Learning", roadmap papers from conferences or workshops.

When NOT to Use

Do not use this skill for:

• Papers that implement a single technique with minimal comparative analysis
• Purely experimental papers (even comprehensive ones) without conceptual synthesis
• Literature reviews that are just lists of papers without organization or taxonomy
• Papers that discuss existing methods but don't help readers navigate or choose between them
• Narrow domain papers that only survey variations of one specific approach
• Papers without clear structure, decision points, or organizing principles

Extraction Template

For Comprehensive Surveys

Step 1: Field Definition & Scope

Extract what the survey bounds and covers.

**Field/Topic:** What research area is being surveyed?
**Scope Boundaries:** What is IN scope? What is OUT of scope?
**Temporal Coverage:** When was this field established? What time period does the survey cover?
**Key Assumption:** What foundational concept unites this field?
**Motivation:** Why survey this now? What triggered the need for synthesis?

Step 2: Taxonomy Construction

Document the organizing principle the survey uses.

**Top-Level Categories:** What are the main buckets for organizing research?
**Organizing Principle:** Is it grouped by problem, solution, time, application, or some other dimension?
**Decision Points:** What factors determine which category a paper falls into?
**Key Distinctions:** What are the critical differences between categories?
**Relationship Map:** How do categories relate to each other? Orthogonal? Hierarchical? Overlapping?

Step 3: Method Comparison Matrix

Extract decision criteria for choosing between approaches.

**Method A:** [name, core idea, when to use, pros, cons, required resources]
**Method B:** [name, core idea, when to use, pros, cons, required resources]
**Method C:** [name, core idea, when to use, pros, cons, required resources]
**Decision Criteria:** What factors determine which method is best?
**Common Pitfalls:** What mistakes do practitioners make when choosing between methods?

Step 4: Literature Navigation

Extract heuristics for reading the field strategically.

**Essential Foundation Papers:** Must-read foundational works to understand the field
**Landmark Shifts:** Papers that changed how the field thinks
**Domain-Specific Tracks:** Different research threads within the field (e.g., scaling track, alignment track, efficiency track)
**For Practitioners:** Key papers if you're implementing something in this domain
**For Theorists:** Key papers if you're advancing fundamental understanding

Step 5: Open Problems & Research Directions

Document unresolved questions and suggested next steps.

**Identified Gaps:** What does current research NOT address?
**Open Questions:** Specific unsolved problems the survey identifies
**Scaling Frontiers:** How should the field scale in future? (scale, compute, data, human effort)
**Bottlenecks:** What is preventing progress on key challenges?
**Suggested Directions:** What research avenues does the survey recommend?

For Position Papers

Step 1: Core Thesis

Extract the argued perspective.

**Central Claim:** What is the paper arguing?
**Target Audience:** Who needs to hear this argument? (researchers, practitioners, policymakers)
**Problem Statement:** What is the status quo getting wrong?
**Proposed Direction:** What should the field do instead?

Step 2: Evidence Structure

Document how the argument is supported.

**Key Evidence:** What empirical or conceptual evidence supports the thesis?
**Counterarguments:** What objections might be raised? How does the paper address them?
**Analogies & Examples:** What real-world cases demonstrate the thesis?
**Failure Case:** What would disprove the thesis?

Step 3: Implementation Implications

Extract what changes if the position is adopted.

**If Right:** How should research directions change?
**If Wrong:** What would we learn from the contradiction?
**Research Priorities:** What work becomes more important if this position is true?
**Evaluation Strategy:** How should the community test this position?

For Tutorials & Pedagogical Papers

Step 1: Learning Progression

Extract the teaching structure.

**Prerequisite Knowledge:** What must readers know first?
**Pedagogical Order:** In what sequence are concepts introduced?
**Key Inflection Points:** Where does understanding suddenly click?
**Common Misconceptions:** What do learners typically misunderstand?

Step 2: Worked Examples

Document the teaching methodology.

**Simplest Case:** Minimal example showing the core idea
**Elaborated Case:** Medium-complexity example with important variations
**Edge Case:** Complex example revealing limitations or subtleties
**Anti-pattern:** Example of what NOT to do and why

Step 3: Practice Guidance

Extract learning scaffolding.

**Concept Checks:** Self-test questions at each stage
**Implementation Milestones:** Checkpoints for hands-on practice
**Common Errors & Debugging:** What goes wrong during practice and how to fix it
**Next Steps:** How to extend understanding beyond the tutorial

For Research Roadmaps

Step 1: Current State Assessment

Document what has been achieved.

**Accomplished:** What has the field solved well?
**Mature Techniques:** What approaches have been thoroughly validated?
**Standard Benchmarks:** What evaluation practices are established?
**Known Tradeoffs:** What design choices are well-understood?

Step 2: Barriers & Bottlenecks

Extract what is preventing progress.

**Technical Bottlenecks:** What fundamental limits are known? (e.g., scaling limits, memory constraints)
**Resource Constraints:** What bottlenecks are resource-dependent? (compute, data, human effort)
**Conceptual Gaps:** What fundamental understanding is missing?
**Measurement Challenges:** What is hard to measure or evaluate?

Step 3: Proposed Next Frontiers

Document the suggested research path forward.

**Near-term (1-2 years):** What should the field tackle immediately?
**Medium-term (3-5 years):** What are the next big goals?
**Long-term (5+ years):** What are moonshot ambitious directions?
**Key Milestones:** How will we know we are making progress?
**Required Investments:** What resources (compute, data, talent) are needed?

Output Skill Format

Generate a new SKILL.md with the following structure:

Frontmatter:

---
name: [kebab-case-field-or-topic-name]
title: [Survey/Position/Roadmap: {Title} — Field Guide]
version: 0.0.2
engine: skillxiv-v0.0.2-claude-opus-4.6
license: MIT
url: [verified arxiv link to source paper]
keywords: [taxonomy, survey, research-directions, field-navigation, or domain-specific terms]
description: Navigate {field/topic} by understanding {taxonomy/position/roadmap}. Extracts {taxonomy structure OR decision tree OR open problems}, enabling practitioners to {choose approaches OR understand landscape OR guide next research}. Use when selecting methods in {field}, understanding how {domain} has evolved, identifying unresolved challenges, or planning research directions.
---

Skill Body Structure:

1. Field Overview (1 paragraph): What is the scope, timeline, and unifying concept?
2. Taxonomy or Organizing Principle (1-2 paragraphs + visual text-based breakdown): How is the field organized? What are the main categories?
3. Method Comparison or Position Framework (3-5 bullet points): Key decision criteria for choosing between approaches OR core thesis and implications
4. Literature Navigation or Learning Path (3-5 bullet points): Essential papers, conceptual tracks, or learning progression
5. Open Questions & Research Directions (1 paragraph + 4-6 bullet points): What does the field need next?
6. When to Use This Skill (1-2 sentences): What research or decision-making scenarios apply this framework?

Length: 150-250 lines

Processing Instructions

1. Identify paper type: Determine if this is a comprehensive survey, position paper, tutorial, or roadmap
2. Obtain the paper: Fetch HTML from arxiv.org/html/{arxiv_id}, fallback to PDF
3. Extract taxonomy: For surveys, identify the organizing principle and major categories
4. Map decision points: What factors determine how papers or methods are grouped?
5. Identify open problems: What does the paper identify as unresolved questions?
6. Extract literature heuristics: What papers should practitioners know? In what order?
7. Build field guide: Synthesize the extraction into a practical navigation tool
8. Validate comprehensiveness: Confirm the output skill helps practitioners or researchers navigate the field

Quality Checks

• Paper is clearly a survey, position paper, tutorial, or roadmap (not a single-technique paper)
• Taxonomy or organizing principle is explicit and can be explained in 2-3 sentences
• Decision criteria for method selection are identifiable
• At least 3-5 open questions or future research directions are extracted
• Literature navigation heuristics help readers prioritize what to read
• For tutorials: learning progression and common misconceptions are documented
• For position papers: thesis and counterarguments are clear
• For roadmaps: current achievements, bottlenecks, and next steps are distinguished
• Output skill functions as a field guide/decision tree, not a summary
• Keywords (5-10) include domain terms and "survey", "taxonomy", "navigation", or "directions"
• Description is under 1024 characters
• Engine tag matches skillxiv-v0.0.2-claude-opus-4.6

Common Pitfalls

• Mistaking a single-technique paper for a survey: Papers with "survey" in the title may still focus on one method. Check if it truly compares multiple approaches and provides a taxonomy.
• Extracting raw paper lists instead of structure: A skill should teach HOW to navigate the field, not just list all papers. Focus on organizing principles and decision criteria.
• Missing the conceptual synthesis: The valuable part of surveys is the organizing principle. Don't just paraphrase paper titles — extract the taxonomy that explains them.
• Ignoring open problems: The most useful part of a survey is often what it says the field still needs to solve. Prioritize this section.
• Treating tutorials as data transfer: A good tutorial skill extracts the pedagogical order and common misconceptions, not just the technical content.
• Ignoring position/perspective: Position papers are valuable specifically because they argue a perspective. Capture the thesis and evidence, not just the content.
• Missing decision heuristics: For practitioners, the most useful extraction is: given these constraints/goals, which approach should I use?