Interactive skill that guides extraction of research paradigms and methodological techniques from cognitive science papers into structured, reusable skills
An interactive skill for extracting research paradigms and methodological techniques from cognitive science and neuroscience papers. The output is a well-structured skill conforming to this project's SKILL.md format.
Focus: Strict extraction of reproducible methods — experimental designs, data acquisition parameters, processing pipelines, analysis procedures, and stimulus specifications. This is NOT about summarizing a paper's novelty or theoretical contributions.
Trigger Conditions
Activate this skill when the user:
Provides a paper (PDF path, file, or pasted text) and asks to extract research skills/methods
Uses phrases like "extract skills from this paper", "turn this paper into a skill", "what methods can I reuse from this paper"
Research Planning Protocol
Before extracting skills from a paper, you MUST:
Clarify the extraction goal — What type of methodological knowledge is the user looking for?
Justify the source — Is this paper a suitable source (empirical, methods, review)? What type-specific extraction strategy applies?
Declare expected outputs — What kind of skill(s) do you expect to generate (paradigm design, analysis pipeline, modeling)?
Note limitations — Are there missing parameters, ambiguous descriptions, or domain gaps in this paper?
Present the extraction plan to the user and WAIT for confirmation before proceeding.
For detailed methodology guidance, see the research-literacy skill.
⚠️ Verification Notice
This skill was generated by AI from academic literature. All parameters, thresholds, and citations require independent verification before use in research. If you find errors, please open an issue.
Interactive Workflow
Phase 1: Paper Ingestion
Read the paper provided by the user (PDF path, file content, or pasted sections).
PDF Reading Guidance — Claude Code's Read tool natively supports PDF files. Use the following strategy:
Short PDFs (up to ~10 pages): Read the entire file in a single call with no pages parameter.
Long PDFs (more than 10 pages): Read in chunks using the pages parameter (maximum 20 pages per request). Example sequence: pages: "1-10", then pages: "11-20", and so on.
Recommended reading order:
Read pages 1-2 first (abstract + introduction) to identify the paper type and decide whether full extraction is warranted.
Then read the Methods section in detail (locate the relevant page range from the table of contents or section headers).
Read Results and Discussion selectively for reported parameter values not stated in Methods.
Identify the paper type — this determines the extraction strategy:
Experimental paper — contains original experiments with participants
Methods paper — introduces or validates an analysis technique/pipeline
Computational modeling paper — builds or tests formal models of cognition
Review/theoretical paper — synthesizes literature or proposes theoretical frameworks
Confirm the paper type with the user before proceeding.
See references/extraction-guide.md for detailed extraction strategies per paper type.
Phase 2: Content Scanning and Candidate Identification
Scan the paper and identify all extractable methodological content organized into these categories:
Norming procedures, controlled variables, material selection criteria
Describes a computational model with equations/parameters
Model fitting procedure, parameter priors, model comparison strategy
Provides actionable methodological recommendations with specific values
"Use minimum 30 trials per condition", "Set high-pass filter no lower than 0.1 Hz"
NOT SUITABLE — filter out if the candidate:
Criterion
Examples
Is narrative or historical overview
"The study of attention began with William James..."
Is a definition without actionable parameters
"Working memory is defined as..."
Is theoretical debate without methods
"The modularity hypothesis predicts..."
Is motivation or background only
"Previous studies have shown that..." leading to no method
Contains only results without methodological detail
"The ANOVA revealed a significant main effect..."
Decision rule: "Does this candidate contain enough specific, actionable detail that a researcher could REPRODUCE a method, pipeline, or paradigm from it?" If YES → [SUITABLE]. If NO or UNCERTAIN → [FILTERED — reason].
Mark each candidate when presenting to the user. Filtered candidates are shown but de-prioritized — the user can override any filter decision.
Phase 3: User Selection and Confirmation
Receive the user's selection of which items to extract.
For each selected item, perform deep extraction (see extraction depth requirements below).
Present the extracted detail for user review before generating the final skill file.
Phase 4: Skill Generation
Generate the skill file(s) using the standard template (see references/skill-template.md).
Each generated skill must:
Have valid YAML frontmatter with name, description, and papers fields
Include all numerical parameters with their citations from the source paper
Stay under 500 lines; use references/ subdirectory for overflow
Pass the domain-knowledge litmus test: "Would a competent programmer who has never taken a cognitive science course get this wrong?"
Present the generated skill to the user and ask for confirmation before saving.
Phase 5: Self-Verification (Hallucination Check)
After generating the skill but before saving, perform a systematic verification of every numerical parameter and specific factual claim against the source paper.
Verification procedure — for each numerical value or specific claim in the generated skill:
Locate in source — Find the corresponding statement in the original paper. Use the source location recorded during extraction.
Verify value — Confirm exact numerical match, correct units, and complete context (e.g., "0.1-30 Hz bandpass" must not be truncated to "0.1 Hz").
Classify any issues found:
Issue Type
Description
Severity
not_found
Claim appears in the skill but cannot be found in the source — likely hallucinated
High
value_mismatch
Value exists in source but differs (e.g., skill says "250 ms", source says "200 ms")
High
unit_error
Numerical value matches but units are wrong or missing
High
context_distortion
Value is technically present but used in misleading context
Medium
location_wrong
Value is correct but the claimed source location is wrong
Low
incomplete
Skill presents a partial version of a parameter that has important qualifiers
Low
Reporting — Present the verification results to the user:
Self-Verification Results:
- Claims checked: N
- Verified: M
- Issues found: K
- [HIGH] <claim> — <issue type>: <details>
- [LOW] <claim> — <issue type>: <details>
Rules:
High-severity issues (not_found, value_mismatch, unit_error) must be corrected before saving.
Medium/low-severity issues are flagged but the skill can be saved with them annotated.
Do NOT flag reasonable paraphrasing, organizational differences, or standard terminology substitutions.
Extraction Depth Requirements
For every extracted item, the following cross-cutting rules apply to ALL categories:
Cross-Cutting Extraction Rules
Preserve exact numbers — Never round. If the paper says "513 ms", write "513 ms", not "~500 ms".
Track source location — For every extracted numerical value, record where it appears in the paper: "Section X.Y, paragraph N", "Table N", "Figure N caption", or "Supplementary Materials, page N". This enables downstream verification.
Flag missing information — If a standard parameter for this method type is not reported in the paper, explicitly note its absence (e.g., "Filter order: not reported").
Capture rationale — When the authors explain WHY they chose a parameter value, include that justification alongside the value.
Note deviations from convention — When authors explicitly deviate from field conventions, capture both what they did and their stated reason.
These rules apply to every category below. The parameter tables in generated skills must include a Source Location column (see references/skill-template.md).
Experimental Design Parameters
Paradigm name and classification (e.g., "oddball paradigm", "visual world paradigm")
Number of conditions and their operational definitions
Skill name: The name field in YAML frontmatter may only contain lowercase letters, numbers, and hyphens, and must match the folder name — e.g., folder mmn-oddball-paradigm/ → name: "mmn-oddball-paradigm"
YAML frontmatter: Contains at minimum name (human-readable) and description (one-sentence summary) fields
Papers field: Frontmatter includes a papers field listing the source paper(s) in "Author, Year" format
Research Planning Protocol: A customized version of the standard preamble is included after the "When to Use" section and before the first domain-specific logic section (see the research-literacy skill for the template)
Line count: SKILL.md is under 500 lines; overflow content is placed in references/ subdirectory
References directory: If supplementary files exist, they live in references/ and are explicitly referenced from SKILL.md
Encoding: UTF-8, LF line endings, 2-space indentation for YAML
Content Quality Checklist
Completeness — Every numerical parameter mentioned in the paper's methods section is captured
Citation accuracy — All values cite the source paper (Author, Year) and page/table number where possible
Reproducibility — Another researcher could implement this method from the skill alone, without reading the original paper
Domain specificity — Every item passes the litmus test: "Would a competent programmer who has never taken a cognitive science course get this wrong?"
Parameter precision — No rounding or approximation of reported values; use exact figures from the paper
Source traceability — Every numerical parameter includes a source location (Section/Table/Figure reference)
Required Structured Sections in Generated Skills
Every generated skill must include these sections (may be empty if no items apply, but must be explicitly checked):
## Missing Information — List standard parameters for this method type that the paper does not report. Format: "- [Parameter name]: Not reported. Standard value from [field/reference] is [value]." This section helps users know what they must determine independently.
## Deviations from Convention — List any methodological choices that deviate from field conventions, with the authors' stated rationale. Format: "- [Choice]: Authors used [X] instead of conventional [Y] because [reason]." This section alerts users to non-standard decisions.
Handling Ambiguity
When the paper is unclear or omits details:
Missing parameters: Flag explicitly — "The paper does not report [X]. This must be determined empirically or sourced from [suggested reference]."
Ambiguous descriptions: Present both plausible interpretations and ask the user to select one.
Non-standard methods: Note deviations from field conventions and flag whether the deviation is intentional (per authors' justification) or potentially an error.
Supplementary materials: Ask the user if supplementary materials are available, as critical method details are often reported there.
Multi-Skill Extraction
When a paper contains multiple independent methods worth extracting:
Generate separate skills for each method that can stand alone (e.g., a paradigm skill and an analysis skill from the same paper).
Cross-reference between skills using relative paths when methods are interdependent.
Each skill must be independently usable — no skill should require reading another skill to function.
Batch Extraction Mode
When the user provides multiple PDFs or a directory of papers, apply the following workflow:
Triggering Batch Mode
Batch mode activates when the user:
Provides two or more PDF paths in a single message
Points to a directory containing multiple papers
Uses phrases like "extract skills from all these papers" or "process this folder"
Batch Processing Steps
Inventory the inputs — List all papers found (file names + page counts if determinable) and present the list to the user for confirmation before reading anything.
Process each paper sequentially — Run each paper through the full 4-phase workflow (Ingestion → Scanning → Selection → Generation). Apply the PDF reading strategy from Phase 1 to every paper.
Present candidates grouped by paper — After scanning all papers, show all extractable candidates together, clearly grouped under each paper's title:
## Paper 1: <Title / filename>
- [1] Paradigm: ...
- [2] Analysis: ...
## Paper 2: <Title / filename>
- [3] Paradigm: ...
- [4] Data Acquisition: ...
Which items would you like to extract? (Enter numbers, ranges, "all", or "all from paper 1")
Allow cross-paper skill merging — If two or more papers describe the same or highly overlapping methods (e.g., both use the same EEG preprocessing pipeline with the same parameters), flag the overlap and offer to merge them into a single skill that cites all source papers. Only merge when the core parameters and decision logic are genuinely shared; keep skills separate when parameter choices differ.
Generate skills independently — Each generated skill must be fully self-contained. No skill may depend on another skill generated from a different paper in the same batch. Cross-reference between skills using relative paths only for closely related methods from the same paper (as in Multi-Skill Extraction above).
Batch Quality Checks
Before finalizing batch output, verify:
Every skill cites its specific source paper(s), not just the batch as a whole.
Merged skills list all contributing papers in the papers frontmatter field.
Skill directory names remain unique across the batch; if two papers generate a similar skill, append a disambiguating suffix (e.g., mmn-oddball-paradigm-smith2019 vs. mmn-oddball-paradigm-jones2021).
The <generated-skill-name> uses kebab-case and is descriptive of the specific method, not the paper. For example:
A paper on ERP mismatch negativity → skills/mmn-oddball-paradigm/
A paper on fMRI preprocessing → skills/fmri-preprocessing-pipeline/
A paper on drift-diffusion modeling → skills/drift-diffusion-fitting/
Example Interaction Summary
User: Extract skills from this paper. [provides PDF path]
Agent: [Reads paper]
This is an experimental paper (EEG study on language processing).
Does that match your understanding?
User: Yes.
Agent: I identified the following extractable methods:
[Lists candidates by category with numbers]
Which items would you like me to extract?
User: 1, 3, 4-6
Agent: Here is the detailed extraction for your selected items:
[Shows extracted parameters for review]
Does this look correct? Any corrections needed?
User: Looks good, but the sampling rate was 512 Hz not 500 Hz.
Agent: Corrected. Here is the generated skill:
[Shows SKILL.md content]
Shall I save this to skills/<name>/SKILL.md?
User: Yes.
Agent: [Saves file]
Skill saved to skills/<name>/SKILL.md.
1---2name: paper-to-skill3description: Interactive skill that guides extraction of research paradigms and methodological techniques from cognitive science papers into structured, reusable skills4---56# Paper-to-Skill Extractor78An interactive skill for extracting **research paradigms and methodological techniques** from cognitive science and neuroscience papers. The output is a well-structured skill conforming to this project's SKILL.md format.910**Focus**: Strict extraction of reproducible methods — experimental designs, data acquisition parameters, processing pipelines, analysis procedures, and stimulus specifications. This is NOT about summarizing a paper's novelty or theoretical contributions.1112---1314## Trigger Conditions1516Activate this skill when the user:1718- Provides a paper (PDF path, file, or pasted text) and asks to extract research skills/methods19- Uses phrases like "extract skills from this paper", "turn this paper into a skill", "what methods can I reuse from this paper"2021---2223## Research Planning Protocol2425Before extracting skills from a paper, you MUST:26271. **Clarify the extraction goal** — What type of methodological knowledge is the user looking for?282. **Justify the source** — Is this paper a suitable source (empirical, methods, review)? What type-specific extraction strategy applies?293. **Declare expected outputs** — What kind of skill(s) do you expect to generate (paradigm design, analysis pipeline, modeling)?304. **Note limitations** — Are there missing parameters, ambiguous descriptions, or domain gaps in this paper?315. **Present the extraction plan to the user and WAIT for confirmation** before proceeding.3233For detailed methodology guidance, see the `research-literacy` skill.343536## ⚠️ Verification Notice3738This skill was generated by AI from academic literature. All parameters, thresholds, and citations require independent verification before use in research. If you find errors, please [open an issue](https://github.com/HaoxuanLiTHUAI/awesome_cognitive_and_neuroscience_skills/issues).3940## Interactive Workflow4142### Phase 1: Paper Ingestion43441. **Read the paper** provided by the user (PDF path, file content, or pasted sections).4546 **PDF Reading Guidance** — Claude Code's Read tool natively supports PDF files. Use the following strategy:4748 - **Short PDFs (up to ~10 pages)**: Read the entire file in a single call with no `pages` parameter.49 - **Long PDFs (more than 10 pages)**: Read in chunks using the `pages` parameter (maximum 20 pages per request). Example sequence: `pages: "1-10"`, then `pages: "11-20"`, and so on.50 - **Recommended reading order**:51 1. Read pages 1-2 first (abstract + introduction) to identify the paper type and decide whether full extraction is warranted.52 2. Then read the Methods section in detail (locate the relevant page range from the table of contents or section headers).53 3. Read Results and Discussion selectively for reported parameter values not stated in Methods.54552. **Identify the paper type** — this determines the extraction strategy:56 - **Experimental paper** — contains original experiments with participants57 - **Methods paper** — introduces or validates an analysis technique/pipeline58 - **Computational modeling paper** — builds or tests formal models of cognition59 - **Review/theoretical paper** — synthesizes literature or proposes theoretical frameworks603. **Confirm the paper type** with the user before proceeding.6162> See `references/extraction-guide.md` for detailed extraction strategies per paper type.6364### Phase 2: Content Scanning and Candidate Identification6566Scan the paper and identify **all extractable methodological content** organized into these categories:6768| Category | What to Look For |69|---|---|70| **Experimental Design** | Paradigm name, trial structure, timing parameters, condition setup, counterbalancing scheme, block design |71| **Data Acquisition** | Sampling rate, electrode montage, imaging parameters, eye-tracking settings, physiological recording setup |72| **Data Processing** | Preprocessing steps with parameters, artifact handling methods, data cleaning criteria, epoching parameters |73| **Analysis Methods** | Statistical models, multiple comparison corrections, effect size calculations, visualization methods, decoding approaches |74| **Stimulus Materials** | Construction rules, control variables, norming standards, presentation parameters, response mappings |7576**Present candidates to the user** in the following format:7778```79I identified the following extractable methods from this paper:8081## Experimental Design82- [1] Paradigm: <name> — <brief description>83- [2] Trial structure: <summary of trial flow and timing>8485## Data Acquisition86- [3] <Modality> recording setup: <key parameters>8788## Data Processing89- [4] Preprocessing pipeline: <step summary>90- [5] Artifact rejection: <method and criteria>9192## Analysis Methods93- [6] <Analysis name>: <brief description>94- [7] <Analysis name>: <brief description>9596## Stimulus Materials97- [8] <Material type>: <construction approach>9899Which items would you like me to extract into skills?100(Enter numbers, ranges like 1-4, or "all")101```102103### Phase 2.5: Suitability Gate104105Before presenting candidates, apply this strict suitability filter to each one:106107**SUITABLE** — include if the candidate:108109| Criterion | Examples |110|-----------|----------|111| Describes an **experimental paradigm or design** with specifics | Trial structure, timing parameters, condition definitions, counterbalancing |112| Describes a **data processing pipeline** with parameters | Preprocessing steps, filter cutoffs, software settings |113| Describes an **analysis method** with concrete steps | Statistical model specification, time-frequency decomposition, classification pipeline |114| Contains **specific numerical parameters or settings** | Thresholds, epoch windows, stimulus dimensions, sample sizes |115| Describes **stimulus construction norms** | Norming procedures, controlled variables, material selection criteria |116| Describes a **computational model** with equations/parameters | Model fitting procedure, parameter priors, model comparison strategy |117| Provides **actionable methodological recommendations** with specific values | "Use minimum 30 trials per condition", "Set high-pass filter no lower than 0.1 Hz" |118119**NOT SUITABLE** — filter out if the candidate:120121| Criterion | Examples |122|-----------|----------|123| Is **narrative or historical overview** | "The study of attention began with William James..." |124| Is a **definition without actionable parameters** | "Working memory is defined as..." |125| Is **theoretical debate without methods** | "The modularity hypothesis predicts..." |126| Is **motivation or background** only | "Previous studies have shown that..." leading to no method |127| Contains **only results** without methodological detail | "The ANOVA revealed a significant main effect..." |128129**Decision rule**: "Does this candidate contain enough specific, actionable detail that a researcher could **REPRODUCE** a method, pipeline, or paradigm from it?" If YES → `[SUITABLE]`. If NO or UNCERTAIN → `[FILTERED — reason]`.130131Mark each candidate when presenting to the user. Filtered candidates are shown but de-prioritized — the user can override any filter decision.132133### Phase 3: User Selection and Confirmation1341351. **Receive the user's selection** of which items to extract.1362. For each selected item, perform **deep extraction** (see extraction depth requirements below).1373. **Present the extracted detail** for user review before generating the final skill file.138139### Phase 4: Skill Generation1401411. Generate the skill file(s) using the standard template (see `references/skill-template.md`).1422. Each generated skill must:143 - Have valid YAML frontmatter with `name`, `description`, and `papers` fields144 - Include all numerical parameters with their citations from the source paper145 - Stay under 500 lines; use `references/` subdirectory for overflow146 - Pass the domain-knowledge litmus test: "Would a competent programmer who has never taken a cognitive science course get this wrong?"1473. Present the generated skill to the user and ask for confirmation before saving.148149### Phase 5: Self-Verification (Hallucination Check)150151After generating the skill but **before saving**, perform a systematic verification of every numerical parameter and specific factual claim against the source paper.152153**Verification procedure** — for each numerical value or specific claim in the generated skill:1541551. **Locate in source** — Find the corresponding statement in the original paper. Use the source location recorded during extraction.1562. **Verify value** — Confirm exact numerical match, correct units, and complete context (e.g., "0.1-30 Hz bandpass" must not be truncated to "0.1 Hz").1573. **Classify any issues found**:158159| Issue Type | Description | Severity |160|------------|-------------|----------|161| `not_found` | Claim appears in the skill but cannot be found in the source — likely hallucinated | **High** |162| `value_mismatch` | Value exists in source but differs (e.g., skill says "250 ms", source says "200 ms") | **High** |163| `unit_error` | Numerical value matches but units are wrong or missing | **High** |164| `context_distortion` | Value is technically present but used in misleading context | **Medium** |165| `location_wrong` | Value is correct but the claimed source location is wrong | **Low** |166| `incomplete` | Skill presents a partial version of a parameter that has important qualifiers | **Low** |167168**Reporting** — Present the verification results to the user:169170```171Self-Verification Results:172- Claims checked: N173- Verified: M174- Issues found: K175 - [HIGH] <claim> — <issue type>: <details>176 - [LOW] <claim> — <issue type>: <details>177```178179**Rules**:180- **High-severity issues** (not_found, value_mismatch, unit_error) **must be corrected** before saving.181- **Medium/low-severity issues** are flagged but the skill can be saved with them annotated.182- Do NOT flag reasonable paraphrasing, organizational differences, or standard terminology substitutions.183184---185186## Extraction Depth Requirements187188For every extracted item, the following cross-cutting rules apply to ALL categories:189190### Cross-Cutting Extraction Rules1911921. **Preserve exact numbers** — Never round. If the paper says "513 ms", write "513 ms", not "~500 ms".1932. **Track source location** — For every extracted numerical value, record where it appears in the paper: "Section X.Y, paragraph N", "Table N", "Figure N caption", or "Supplementary Materials, page N". This enables downstream verification.1943. **Flag missing information** — If a standard parameter for this method type is not reported in the paper, explicitly note its absence (e.g., "Filter order: not reported").1954. **Capture rationale** — When the authors explain WHY they chose a parameter value, include that justification alongside the value.1965. **Note deviations from convention** — When authors explicitly deviate from field conventions, capture both what they did and their stated reason.197198These rules apply to every category below. The parameter tables in generated skills must include a **Source Location** column (see `references/skill-template.md`).199200### Experimental Design Parameters201202- Paradigm name and classification (e.g., "oddball paradigm", "visual world paradigm")203- Number of conditions and their operational definitions204- Trial sequence: fixation → stimulus → ISI → response window (with exact ms values)205- Number of trials per condition and total206- Block structure and rest intervals207- Counterbalancing method (Latin square, full counterbalancing, pseudo-randomization constraints)208- Practice trial specifications209- Participant exclusion criteria applied at the design level210211### Data Acquisition Parameters212213- **EEG**: Sampling rate (Hz), electrode count and montage system, reference electrode, ground electrode, impedance threshold, amplifier model, filter settings during recording214- **fMRI**: TR, TE, voxel size, slice count, slice order, field strength, coil type, number of volumes, dummy scans discarded215- **Eye-tracking**: Sampling rate, calibration procedure (5-point, 9-point), fixation definition criteria, saccade velocity threshold216- **Behavioral**: Response device, response mapping, timeout duration, feedback presence/absence217- **MEG**: Sampling rate, sensor type and count, head position indicator settings, noise reduction method218219### Data Processing Pipeline220221- Software used (with version numbers)222- Step-by-step sequence with order preserved223- Filter parameters: type (FIR/IIR), cutoff frequencies, order/transition bandwidth, causal vs. zero-phase224- Re-referencing scheme225- Epoching: time window relative to event, baseline correction window226- Artifact rejection: method (threshold, ICA, regression), specific thresholds and criteria227- Trial/participant exclusion rates reported228- Interpolation method for bad channels229230### Analysis Method Details231232- Statistical test name and implementation233- Model specification (for regression/mixed models: fixed effects, random effects, link function)234- Multiple comparison correction: method, parameters (e.g., cluster-forming threshold, number of permutations)235- Region of interest definitions (coordinates, anatomical labels, time windows)236- Effect size measure used and interpretation benchmarks237- Visualization methods with axis specifications238239### Stimulus Material Specifications240241- Material type (words, images, sounds, videos)242- Total number of stimuli and per-condition counts243- Controlled variables and matching criteria (frequency, length, luminance, valence)244- Norming source and database (e.g., "SUBTLEX-US word frequency", "IAPS valence ratings")245- Presentation parameters: duration, size/visual angle, position, contrast246- Randomization constraints applied to stimulus ordering247248### Computational Modeling Parameters249250- Model name and class (e.g., "drift-diffusion model", "Bayesian ideal observer", "recurrent neural network")251- **Model equations and architecture**: All equations with variable definitions, relationship between equations, boundary/initial conditions252- **Free vs. fixed parameters**: List each with cognitive interpretation and role253- **Parameter constraints and priors**:254 - Constraint bounds (lower, upper) for each free parameter255 - Prior distribution family and hyperparameters (if Bayesian), with justification256 - Starting values and number of starting points (if frequentist optimization)257- **Fitting methods**:258 - Objective function (maximum likelihood, least squares, Bayesian posterior)259 - Optimization algorithm and implementation (software, package, version)260 - For MCMC: number of chains, samples per chain, burn-in period, thinning, convergence diagnostic (R-hat threshold)261 - For MLE: convergence criteria, number of random restarts262 - Data summary statistics used for fitting (if not raw trial data)263- **Model comparison**: Comparison metric (AIC, BIC, WAIC, Bayes factor), how group-level comparison was performed, model recovery/confusion matrix results264- **Simulation procedures**: Parameter settings used, number of simulated datasets, random seed handling, what predictions were generated265266### Methodological Recommendations (for Reviews/Textbooks)267268When extracting from review papers, meta-analyses, or textbook chapters, capture:269270- **Specific parameter recommendations** with justification and evidence strength271- **Recommended analysis pipelines** with step-by-step parameter values272- **Decision trees or flowcharts** for method selection (e.g., "if X, use method A; if Y, use method B")273- **Meta-analytic effect sizes** with confidence intervals and moderator results274- **Sample size recommendations** based on reported effect sizes and power analyses275- **Common methodological pitfalls** identified across studies, with concrete examples276277---278279## Quality Checks Before Output280281Before presenting the final skill, verify **both** structural compliance and content quality.282283### Structural Compliance Checklist284285Every generated skill must pass these checks before saving:286287- [ ] **File name**: The core file is named exactly `SKILL.md` (uppercase) — not `skill.md`, `Skill.md`, or any other variant288- [ ] **Directory name**: Uses kebab-case (lowercase, hyphen-separated) — e.g., `mmn-oddball-paradigm/`, not `MMN_Oddball_Paradigm/`289- [ ] **Skill name**: The `name` field in YAML frontmatter may only contain lowercase letters, numbers, and hyphens, and must match the folder name — e.g., folder `mmn-oddball-paradigm/` → `name: "mmn-oddball-paradigm"`290- [ ] **YAML frontmatter**: Contains at minimum `name` (human-readable) and `description` (one-sentence summary) fields291- [ ] **Papers field**: Frontmatter includes a `papers` field listing the source paper(s) in "Author, Year" format292- [ ] **Dependencies field**: Frontmatter includes `dependencies.required: [research-literacy]` (all domain skills require this)293- [ ] **Research Planning Protocol**: A customized version of the standard preamble is included after the "When to Use" section and before the first domain-specific logic section (see the `research-literacy` skill for the template)294- [ ] **Line count**: SKILL.md is under 500 lines; overflow content is placed in `references/` subdirectory295- [ ] **References directory**: If supplementary files exist, they live in `references/` and are explicitly referenced from SKILL.md296- [ ] **Encoding**: UTF-8, LF line endings, 2-space indentation for YAML297298### Content Quality Checklist2993001. **Completeness** — Every numerical parameter mentioned in the paper's methods section is captured3012. **Citation accuracy** — All values cite the source paper (Author, Year) and page/table number where possible3023. **Reproducibility** — Another researcher could implement this method from the skill alone, without reading the original paper3034. **Domain specificity** — Every item passes the litmus test: "Would a competent programmer who has never taken a cognitive science course get this wrong?"3045. **Parameter precision** — No rounding or approximation of reported values; use exact figures from the paper3056. **Source traceability** — Every numerical parameter includes a source location (Section/Table/Figure reference)306307### Required Structured Sections in Generated Skills308309Every generated skill must include these sections (may be empty if no items apply, but must be explicitly checked):310311- **`## Missing Information`** — List standard parameters for this method type that the paper does not report. Format: "- **[Parameter name]**: Not reported. Standard value from [field/reference] is [value]." This section helps users know what they must determine independently.312- **`## Deviations from Convention`** — List any methodological choices that deviate from field conventions, with the authors' stated rationale. Format: "- **[Choice]**: Authors used [X] instead of conventional [Y] because [reason]." This section alerts users to non-standard decisions.313314---315316## Handling Ambiguity317318When the paper is unclear or omits details:319320- **Missing parameters**: Flag explicitly — "The paper does not report [X]. This must be determined empirically or sourced from [suggested reference]."321- **Ambiguous descriptions**: Present both plausible interpretations and ask the user to select one.322- **Non-standard methods**: Note deviations from field conventions and flag whether the deviation is intentional (per authors' justification) or potentially an error.323- **Supplementary materials**: Ask the user if supplementary materials are available, as critical method details are often reported there.324325---326327## Multi-Skill Extraction328329When a paper contains multiple independent methods worth extracting:3303311. Generate **separate skills** for each method that can stand alone (e.g., a paradigm skill and an analysis skill from the same paper).3322. Cross-reference between skills using relative paths when methods are interdependent.3333. Each skill must be independently usable — no skill should require reading another skill to function.334335---336337## Batch Extraction Mode338339When the user provides **multiple PDFs or a directory of papers**, apply the following workflow:340341### Triggering Batch Mode342343Batch mode activates when the user:344345- Provides two or more PDF paths in a single message346- Points to a directory containing multiple papers347- Uses phrases like "extract skills from all these papers" or "process this folder"348349### Batch Processing Steps3503511. **Inventory the inputs** — List all papers found (file names + page counts if determinable) and present the list to the user for confirmation before reading anything.3522. **Process each paper sequentially** — Run each paper through the full 4-phase workflow (Ingestion → Scanning → Selection → Generation). Apply the PDF reading strategy from Phase 1 to every paper.3533. **Present candidates grouped by paper** — After scanning all papers, show all extractable candidates together, clearly grouped under each paper's title:354355 ```356 ## Paper 1: <Title / filename>357 - [1] Paradigm: ...358 - [2] Analysis: ...359360 ## Paper 2: <Title / filename>361 - [3] Paradigm: ...362 - [4] Data Acquisition: ...363364 Which items would you like to extract? (Enter numbers, ranges, "all", or "all from paper 1")365 ```3663674. **Allow cross-paper skill merging** — If two or more papers describe the same or highly overlapping methods (e.g., both use the same EEG preprocessing pipeline with the same parameters), flag the overlap and offer to merge them into a single skill that cites all source papers. Only merge when the core parameters and decision logic are genuinely shared; keep skills separate when parameter choices differ.3683695. **Generate skills independently** — Each generated skill must be fully self-contained. No skill may depend on another skill generated from a different paper in the same batch. Cross-reference between skills using relative paths only for closely related methods from the same paper (as in Multi-Skill Extraction above).370371### Batch Quality Checks372373Before finalizing batch output, verify:374375- Every skill cites its specific source paper(s), not just the batch as a whole.376- Merged skills list all contributing papers in the `papers` frontmatter field.377- Skill directory names remain unique across the batch; if two papers generate a similar skill, append a disambiguating suffix (e.g., `mmn-oddball-paradigm-smith2019` vs. `mmn-oddball-paradigm-jones2021`).378379---380381## Output Structure382383Generated skills follow the directory convention:384385```386skills/<generated-skill-name>/387 SKILL.md # Core skill content (<500 lines)388 references/389 parameter-table.yaml # Full parameter values (if needed)390 pipeline-steps.md # Extended pipeline details (if needed)391```392393The `<generated-skill-name>` uses kebab-case and is descriptive of the specific method, not the paper. For example:394395- A paper on ERP mismatch negativity → `skills/mmn-oddball-paradigm/`396- A paper on fMRI preprocessing → `skills/fmri-preprocessing-pipeline/`397- A paper on drift-diffusion modeling → `skills/drift-diffusion-fitting/`398399---400401## Example Interaction Summary402403```404User: Extract skills from this paper. [provides PDF path]405406Agent: [Reads paper]407 This is an experimental paper (EEG study on language processing).408 Does that match your understanding?409410User: Yes.411412Agent: I identified the following extractable methods:413 [Lists candidates by category with numbers]414 Which items would you like me to extract?415416User: 1, 3, 4-6417418Agent: Here is the detailed extraction for your selected items:419 [Shows extracted parameters for review]420 Does this look correct? Any corrections needed?421422User: Looks good, but the sampling rate was 512 Hz not 500 Hz.423424Agent: Corrected. Here is the generated skill:425 [Shows SKILL.md content]426 Shall I save this to skills/<name>/SKILL.md?427428User: Yes.429430Agent: [Saves file]431 Skill saved to skills/<name>/SKILL.md.432```
Run npx skillmds@latest add neuroaihub/paper-to-skill in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.
Interactive skill that guides extraction of research paradigms and methodological techniques from cognitive science papers into structured, reusable skills It is listed under Research & Search on SkillMD.
This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.
This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.
Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.
neuroaihub (@neuroaihub) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.