academic-paper-reviewer

Simulate a five-reviewer editorial panel to assess academic manuscripts.

306|35|Updated Nov 1, 2020

Search Tags:#calibration #peer-review #re-review #academic-review #llm-agent #editorial-synthesis

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/zillionare/zillionare --skill academic-paper-reviewer-zillionare

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: academic-paper-reviewer
Source: https://github.com/zillionare/zillionare/tree/main/.claude/skills/academic-paper-reviewer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/zillionare/zillionare --skill academic-paper-reviewer-zillionare

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill provides a modular, AI-driven panel of diverse reviewers to simulate a complete editorial process for academic papers, enabling structured feedback from multiple disciplinary viewpoints.

Core Features & Use Cases

Five independent reviewers: Editor-in-Chief, Methodology, Domain, Perspective, and Devil's Advocate each produce their own assessment to ensure broad scrutiny.
End-to-end workflow support: Generates individual reports, an Editorial Decision Letter, and a Revision Roadmap to guide authors through revision cycles.
Calibration & guidance: Supports optional calibration mode and Socratic revision coaching to improve review quality and transparency.

Quick Start

Run the full-review sequence on a manuscript to obtain five parallel reviewer reports and a consolidated decision with actionable revisions.

Frequently Asked Questions about academic-paper-reviewer

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I get multi-perspective peer review for my academic paper?▼

Multi-perspective peer review for an academic paper is generated by simulating an editorial panel of five distinct reviewers, including an Editor-in-Chief, methodology expert, domain expert, perspective reviewer, and devil's advocate. Each reviewer independently assesses the manuscript before the editor synthesizes a final decision.

Can I use automated peer review for post-submission revisions and re-review?▼

Yes, automated peer review supports post-submission revisions and re-review by generating individual reviewer reports, an Editorial Decision Letter, and a structured Revision Roadmap to guide authors through subsequent revision cycles.

What is the best way to synthesize manuscript feedback from different disciplinary viewpoints?▼

Synthesizing manuscript feedback from different disciplinary viewpoints is best handled by a simulated editorial panel that produces parallel assessments from methodology, domain, perspective, and devil's advocate reviewers, culminating in a consolidated editorial decision.

Does the academic review process include calibration to improve review quality?▼

Yes, the academic review process includes an optional calibration mode and Socratic revision coaching designed to improve review quality and increase transparency across the five-perspective editorial workflow.

How does the simulated editorial panel generate a revision roadmap?▼

The simulated editorial panel generates a revision roadmap by having the editor synthesize the independent reports from the methodology, domain, perspective, and devil's advocate reviewers into an actionable, structured plan for manuscript revisions.