# Academic Slides Iterative > Build academic Beamer slide decks through a four-phase iterative loop: (0) gather grounded source material, (1) insight-first prose outline with self-critic, (2) LaTeX render + visual verification, (3) fact-drift re-audit against live code. Every slide carries exactly one concept as a flowchart / code block / table / I-O example — never a prose bullet list. The deck itself is lean (keywords + figures); a companion talking-points markdown carries the depth. Leads with a TL;DR slide framed as "since : [added] / [worked] / [missing]". Seeds vs agent-discovered examples are always distinguished. Matches Metropolis Beamer style, no emojis, minimum prose, flowcharts / verbatim boxes / I-O structure preferred over bullet lists. Paper-digest-style principle: explain WHY it matters at an abstract level, not WHAT each file/line does — but numbers and example payloads must be verbatim. MANDATORY TRIGGERS: academic slides, iterative slides, research talk deck, Beamer presentation, one concept per slide, impleme - Skill: `iamseungpil/academic-slides-iterative` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 6 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add iamseungpil/academic-slides-iterative` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/iamseungpil/academic-slides-iterative/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - License: MIT license - Author: iamseungpil (https://skillmd.com/u/iamseungpil) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/iamseungpil/academic-slides-iterative --- # Academic Slides Iterative Build research-talk Beamer decks through a **four-phase loop**: **source → content → form → fact-drift**, with a self-critic gate at each phase. Every slide carries exactly one concept, expressed as a flowchart, code block, table, or I-O example — not as a wall of prose. The deck itself is **lean**: keywords + figures, captions shrunk to one-liners. The depth lives in a **companion markdown** the speaker reads off-stage. ## When to use - User is preparing an implementation walkthrough, research talk, thesis defense, lab meeting, or weekly research update and wants a polished Beamer deck. - User explicitly wants "one concept per slide" / "minimum prose" / "flowchart and code, not bullet lists" / "두괄식" / "lead with conclusion". - User wants the slides to actually reflect their code — function names and real data examples — rather than generic bullet points. - User wants to iterate until clipping / overflow / arrow overlap / stale claim issues are all resolved. - User wants both (a) a lean deck and (b) a companion prose document with deeper explanations. ## Non-goals - Does not generate AI images (no external renders). - Does not write survey papers or long-form manuscripts (see `academic-latex-pipeline`). - Does not target PowerPoint (pure LaTeX Beamer). --- ## Phase 0 — gather grounded source material Before writing any slide, collect concrete artefacts the talk needs to reference. 1. Read the user's intent message verbatim. Extract which acts / parts they want covered. 2. Read the code / data the talk is about. For every claim that will land on a slide, open the actual file and cite `path:line` in a scratch note. A scratch note reference is private to the author; **slides themselves usually do not show file:line** (see Phase 1 rule 8). 3. If the talk cites experimental numbers, load the JSON logs and extract the exact counts. Never paraphrase a number. 4. If the talk cites function signatures or code bodies, copy them verbatim from the source. 5. If real example prompts / skills / responses exist in run artefacts, pull at least 3 concrete examples and decide which diversity axis you want to show. 6. **Seed vs agent-discovered check.** If the example is a skill / prompt / hypothesis that could have come from a hard-coded seed library or prompt scaffold, verify its origin before calling it "what the agent did". A slide that says "look at this skill the agent found" but shows a seed is a factual error. Grep the seed files (e.g., `seed_library.py`, `initial_goals.json`) and exclude any example found there. Write the findings to `slides_source_notes.md` alongside the eventual `.tex`. Every slide you later draft must cite back to a source note entry. --- ## Phase 1 — insight-first prose outline (content gate) Produce a Markdown outline where each slide is a heading with ≤ 80 words of prose describing the one idea, the supporting artefact, and the takeaway sentence. **Do not start LaTeX until this outline passes the self-critic gate below.** ### Mandatory structural skeleton The outline must start with a **두괄식 TL;DR slide** (slide 2, right after title) shaped as three pillars: - `[added since ]` — what mechanisms are new - `[worked]` — what measurable effect they had - `[missing]` — what is still failing, honestly Paper-digest style: the three pillars chain together as a **one-sentence narrative** ("before X → added Y → got Z → still missing W"). The baseline can be a commit hash ("since Friday's commit 1bcf2b5"), a previous release, or a described prior state. Body slides should be sequenced: 1. Title 2. **TL;DR** (the three-pillar slide) 3. Structural overview (per-turn loop / phases / architecture) 4. Module or component maps 5. Per-module deep-dive slides, each with one real I-O example 6. "What worked" — headline structural numbers 7. "What is missing" — the honest gap 8. Minimal fixes (not new architecture) 9. Appendix slides — real traces, time series, lifecycle tables ### Per-slide outline template ```markdown ### Slide N — *One concept:* <one sentence> *Artefact:* <flowchart | verbatim code | table | example box> *Source:* <file:line or run JSON path (private — do not print on slide)> *Takeaway sentence:* <one sentence the speaker will say> ``` ### Phase-1 self-critic gate Loop the following checks until all pass: 1. **One concept per slide.** If a slide's *one concept* line reads like two ideas joined by "and", split or drop the second idea. 2. **Source grounded.** Every slide must name a real file, line, run namespace, or JSON path in the scratch note. "In the world model" is not a source. 3. **Takeaway readable alone.** If the speaker's takeaway needs the artefact to make sense, rewrite the sentence to stand alone. 4. **두괄식 TL;DR present.** Slide 2 is the three-pillar added/worked/missing slide. No "overview" / "agenda" filler slides before it. 5. **No filler slides.** No "what this talk contributes" / "conclusion" / "acknowledgements" slides unless the user explicitly asked — they usually belong in the talk, not the slides. 6. **No fake taxonomies.** No five-kind / taxonomy slides if the implementation does not meaningfully split on them. Show flat lists of real examples instead. 7. **Real examples over illustrations.** If the talk is about a system that has produced actual artefacts (skills, prompts, run responses), the slide must show a real one — not a made-up one. 8. **Abstract on the slide, concrete in the companion.** The slide body itself should describe principles, not file paths / line numbers / rev labels / plan codes. These belong in the companion talking-points markdown. Exception: a short \texttt{path/file.py} citation on a side-note for a trace slide is acceptable. 9. **Seeds excluded from "agent did X" slides.** Any example framed as "what the agent discovered" must not be a hard-coded seed. Verify via grep of seed files before inclusion. Only when all nine checks pass, proceed to Phase 2. --- ## Phase 2 — translate to Beamer, with a render-verify loop ### Per-slide generation rules - Use Metropolis theme: `\usetheme{metropolis}`. Aspect ratio 16:9. - Load `booktabs`, `fancyvrb`, `tikz`, and the TikZ libraries `positioning, arrows.meta, shapes, shapes.geometric, calc, fit, backgrounds`. - A slide is at most one of: - a TikZ flowchart - a `\begin{Verbatim}` block with the real code / prompt / skill - a `booktabs` table with ≤ 6 rows - a single labelled I-O box with input on top, output below - Minimum font in code blocks: `\scriptsize`. Drop to `\tiny` only if the code exceeds 16 lines. - Slide captions ≤ 2 short sentences. Delete adverbs and hedges. If a caption runs > 2 sentences, either move content to the companion markdown or split the slide. - Titles use sentence case, no emoji. - Every TikZ diagram is wrapped in `\resizebox{0.98\textwidth}{!}{ ... }` or `\resizebox{!}{0.8\textheight}{ ... }`. - Arrows use `\tikzset{arr/.style={-{Latex[length=1.6mm]}, thick}}`. - Cross-module / long-range TikZ links route **below** (or above) the boxes through explicit coordinate via-points. Never bend through the centre of a labelled box. - When two boxes may end up horizontally overlapping (common when you place two memory / mem-L / mem-R boxes under a module row), prefer a **single wide bar** spanning the full width instead. ### Render-verify loop After every compile: 1. Run `pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode` twice. Record the return code. 2. Grep the log for `Overfull .* too wide`, `Overfull .* too high`, `LaTeX Error`, `Undefined control sequence`. 3. Render each page to PNG (via `pdftoppm -r 110`) and visually inspect: a. no text is clipped at the slide edge b. arrows terminate on box borders, not through other boxes c. arrows do not land in empty space next to a box d. table columns do not run off the page e. verbatim blocks are not cut off at bottom 4. For every issue found, record `slide N : <issue>` in a scratch list. 5. Apply the smallest fix that removes the issue: - horizontal clipping → wrap TikZ in `\resizebox{0.98\textwidth}{!}` - vertical overflow → shrink fontsize one step or split the slide - arrow crossing a box → route via explicit coordinate below the row - arrow hitting empty space → attach to `(node.south) -- (node.south |- target.north)` patterns - two mem boxes overlapping → collapse into one wide bar - title with underscores rendering wrong → `\texttt{\_underscored\_}` 6. Recompile and loop until all five visual checks pass on every page. Exit the loop only when: - every `pdflatex` pass exits with `RC = 0` - no `LaTeX Error` or `Undefined control sequence` in the log - overflow warnings are either absent or explicitly within the title page frame (Metropolis reports a known cosmetic ~15 pt vbox) - visual inspection of every page found no clipped / overlapping / badly aligned content --- ## Phase 3 — fact-drift audit (re-ground against live code) After Phase 2 closes, the deck is visually correct but may contain stale claims. Research code moves fast; a claim that was true when the outline was drafted may be false an hour later. Run this phase **before** pushing. Audit each slide against the current code: 1. For every slide that names a mechanism ("X is blocked by whitelist"), grep the current source. If the mechanism has been relaxed / renamed / moved, update the slide. 2. For every slide that says "the agent does not X" or "feature X is missing", grep for `X` in the codebase. If the feature is actually wired end-to-end but silently under-used at runtime, rewrite the slide as **"infrastructure exists but unused"**, not "missing". 3. For every numeric claim, re-read the JSON source (planner_state.json, world_model.json, etc.) and confirm the number has not shifted. If a newer run has a different number, prefer the newer one and name the run namespace in the companion markdown. 4. When an external critic (another agent, a reviewer) challenges a claim, do not simply accept or reject. Open the cited file, confirm or refute with actual lines, and amend the slide accordingly. Always write the amended framing so it survives the next drift too. ### Companion markdown (talking points) Produce alongside the `.tex` a `<deck>_talking_points.md` that: - Opens with a 3-line TL;DR matching slide 2's three pillars - Has top-level sections for: Before state, Additions, Measured effects, Honest remaining gap, Minimal fixes - Includes a **"Slide ↔ section roadmap" table** near the end: one row per slide with (slide number, one-line message, which section carries the deep version) - Adds a **time budget** block: e.g., "For a 20-minute talk, spend 2 min on TL;DR, 5 min on structure, 8 min on module examples, 3 min on results-and-gap, 2 min on fixes; appendix only in Q&A" - Gives per-slide speaker script with "what to show / what to say / how it is implemented" for each slide - Lists 2–4 expected questions with draft answers The companion markdown is the place for file paths, line numbers, rev labels, and long prose. The slides stay abstract; the markdown is concrete. Convert the markdown to a PDF via `scripts/md2pdf.py` (weasyprint + Korean CJK fonts baked in). --- ## Phase 4 — push (only when the user asks) When the user asks, push to: - git (if a repo is available locally or via `gh`): commit with a descriptive message that cites which slides changed and why, then `git push`. - Hugging Face datasets (if `hf auth whoami` succeeds): upload the `.tex`, `.pdf`, and companion `.md` and `.pdf`. Always return both URLs to the user. --- ## Paper-digest-style principle Borrowing from the `paper-digest` skill: every slide and every sentence should answer "**why does this matter?**" before "what does it do?". Pair every module with the motivation that explains its existence. Chain cause-and-effect explicitly: "we added X **because** Y; the consequence was Z". The slides carry the chain compressed; the companion markdown carries it in full. Abstract principles over file:line: on the slide say "Trust gate: simulator must earn accuracy before driving real actions", not "Trust gate: `planner.py:220-231` checks `transition_accuracy >= gate_threshold`". Move the latter into the companion. --- ## Supporting files - `references/style_guide.md` — concrete examples of the "one concept, one artefact" rule with good vs bad slide pairs. - `references/tikz_recipes.md` — proven TikZ patterns for decision flowcharts, module maps with via-points, and commit loops. - `references/critic_checklist.md` — the Phase-1 and Phase-3 critic gates as a one-page checklist. - `scripts/render_and_check.sh` — the compile + overfull-grep + page count helper used in the render-verify loop. - `scripts/md2pdf.py` — companion markdown → PDF converter (weasyprint, Noto Sans CJK KR + Noto Sans Mono CJK KR, palette matching the deck).