ml-theory-research-agent

Orchestrates multi-stage ML theory research workflows from literature survey to verified theorem proofs.

65|2|Updated Aug 10, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/DechenZhang/VALG-ML-Theory-Agent --skill ml-theory-research-agent-dechenzhang
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: ml-theory-research-agent
Source: https://github.com/DechenZhang/VALG-ML-Theory-Agent/tree/main/skills/ml-theory-research-agent
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/DechenZhang/VALG-ML-Theory-Agent --skill ml-theory-research-agent-dechenzhang

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Developing rigorous machine-learning theory results requires coordinating literature surveys, idea generation, formalization, and multi-level proof verification, which is error-prone and hard to audit when done ad hoc. This Skill provides a controller that manages the entire research workflow with checkpoints, retry budgets, and auditable artifacts. ## Core Features & Use Cases - End-to-End Workflow Orchestration: Coordinates Workflow 1 (literature survey, perspective selection, idea generation, formalization) and Workflow 2 (proof sketch, global proof, step proofs, assembly, and specialized final reviews). - Subagent Management: Spawns and tracks distinct run-scoped, perspective-scoped, and step-scoped subagents with worker provenance logging and a 12 + 2k distinctness gate per perspective. - Failure-Localized Retry Routing: Routes review failures to the smallest repairable stage under strict MAX_* attempt budgets, archiving consumed artifacts into proof_history before overwrites. - Use Case: Given a research question on generalization bounds, run the controller to survey literature, branch three perspectives, formalize theorem contracts, develop graph-structured proofs, and copy accepted results into results/perspective_M/idea_N/theory. ## Quick Start Invoke the ml-theory-research-agent skill with your research question as the argument, optionally adding a RESEARCH_BRIEF.md, and approve checkpoints as the workflow produces each artifact.

Frequently Asked Questions about ml-theory-research-agent

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I run the ML theory research workflow?

Invoke the controller skill with your research question as $ARGUMENT, optionally providing a RESEARCH_BRIEF.md to refine the direction. The controller runs literature survey, perspective selection, idea generation, formalization, and the split proof workflow, pausing at checkpoints in interactive mode.

What artifacts does the ML theory research agent produce?

It produces LITERATURE_SURVEY.md, Perspective_Selection.md, IDEA_REPORT.md, theory_tracker.md, per-branch setting.md, proof sketches, global proofs, step proofs, review artifacts, and a LaTeX paper template. Accepted results are copied to results/perspective_M/idea_N/theory.

What is the difference between interactive and autopilot RUN_MODE?

Interactive mode, the default, stops at each checkpoint for user approval, edits, or regeneration. Autopilot mode approves checkpoints automatically but still enforces source-direction fidelity, launches all approved perspectives, and requires valid failure evidence for any target drift.

How does the controller handle proof failures and retries?

Reviewers diagnose failures and name the smallest retry target, while the controller owns retry budgets such as MAX_SKETCH_ATTEMPTS_PER_IDEA and MAX_STEP_ATTEMPTS_PER_STEP. Exhausted local budgets escalate from step to sketch to idea, and consumed artifacts are archived under proof_history before reruns.

Does this workflow require subagent support?

Yes, the controller requires a runtime with subagent support, spawning two run-scoped workers plus twelve perspective-scoped subagents and two step-scoped subagents per proof step. Each delegated stage must be logged in worker_log.md with a valid runtime-visible handle.

What are the limitations of the automated theorem workflow?

A run may return zero accepted theorem candidates when all perspectives exhaust their idea or proof budgets. Acceptance depends on passing strict artifact gates and an aggregate review score threshold of 7, and budgets cap total producer attempts per stage.