Slow Teacher's Literature Push Skill Generator
Description
«Slow Teacher's Field Literature Push Skill Generator» is an OpenClaw meta-skill designed specifically for researchers. Simply enter any research field (such as solid-state batteries, CO2RR, cryo-EM, AI agent evaluation, etc.), and it will automatically generate a complete, installable, dedicated literature push skill SKILL.md. This skill strictly follows Slow Teacher's high signal-to-noise principle, with built-in core teams (5–8 members) authentic to the field, an adaptive core journal pool (6–10 journals), precise keyword groups, and a critical reading baseline framework. The generated skill defaults to prioritizing high-quality literature from the previous day each day; if there are no new additions, it expands to the previous 7 days. Output is in the format of a «Slow Teacher Literature Push Card», helping you efficiently track mechanism debates and avoid being misled by flashy results. Truly, it's not about moving papers, but helping you follow a field long-term.
Related Skills
View all
ResearchGuided Literature Search
Search literature differently: this Skill gives you a “map of the field” first. It offers five standout capabilities: ① Reviews first, core papers second (a strict rule)—find 3–5 review articles to map the field, then follow their references to locate core literature, so you are not overwhelmed by hundreds of papers from the start; ② Literature authenticity verification (to prevent AI hallucinations)—uses placeholder-pattern checks and real-time verification through CrossRef, DOI, CNKI, and Wanfang, checking each author, journal, DOI, and page number without fabricating a single reference; ③ Automated advanced CSSCI searches on CNKI—when you have VPN or institutional access, automatically extract CSSCI records and abstracts, up to 100 papers at a time, and save them directly to Excel; ④ Direct English OA downloads—download directly from arXiv, MDPI, Frontiers, and other sources at 100%; download approximately 50–70% of Springer and Elsevier OA papers directly; for paywalled papers, receive a DOI link and VPN download instructions; ⑤ Topic selection with the Three-Circle Focus Method—intersect policy trends, your prior experience, and your problem awareness to turn a vague idea into a genuinely worthwhile research topic. The seven-step core workflow is: research topic design → keyword refinement → find reviews first → find core literature → screen and verify → attempt downloads → produce a prioritized reading list. It also includes two enhanced modules: a structured 12-element breakdown in Excel and iterative reflection after reading. Clear boundaries: it does not promise to bypass CNKI’s anti-scraping protections to download Chinese full texts, log in to a VPN on your behalf, or write the main body of your paper. Designed for graduate students, university faculty, and academic researchers who need to conduct systematic literature searches.
SCI Review Novelty Check – 慢老师
The 慢老师 SCI Review Novelty Check skill is an academic tool specially optimized for depth. It helps researchers systematically and accurately assess whether the innovation points of their own SCI review articles are sufficiently novel and unique, avoiding duplicate publication. The skill strictly follows Professor Slow's T+D Innovation Paradigm through a complete 4-step process: collect 6 core pieces of information from the manuscript, generate multi-dimensional search strategies in Chinese and English, real-time comparison with highly similar literature from the past 5 years, and output a professional report. Ultimately, it produces a complete Chinese report covering three major sections: [Overall Novelty Judgment], [Innovation Points and Unique Contributions], and [Potential Risks and Countermeasure Suggestions].
Literature Review Assistant
Writing a literature review is an inevitable challenge for graduate students—but turning information from 50 papers into a logically structured review, rather than a mere summary list, relies on methodology, not brute force. Tell it your research direction and the core papers you've already read. It first builds a framework—field map, thematic sorting, debates and gaps—then, after your confirmation, helps organize the language chapter by chapter. It doesn't write the paper for you, but helps you present the papers you've read with academic logic. ✨ Core Capabilities 1. Review framework generation: Introduction → Field map → Thematic sections → Debates and gaps → Outlook, standard academic structure 2. Field map: Sort domain development by timeline/school of thought, highlight milestone papers 3. In-depth thematic analysis: Individual paper introduction + intra-group comparison + overall contributions and limitations 4. Debate and gap analysis: At least 3 points of debate + 3 research gaps, with specific literature sources 5. Academic writing norms: Citation format, bilingual terminology, critical language rather than mere description 📱 Use Cases - Literature review chapter for graduate thesis/proposal writing - Related Work section of journal papers - Quick literature overview + structured notes when entering a new field - Used in combination with "论文速读笔记" and "论文双模研读" to form a "Read → Analyze → Synthesize" literature workflow ⚠️ Note: This skill does not perform real-time academic search. You need to provide information on papers you have already read (title/author/key points), and it helps you organize and write.
Slow Teacher's Literature Push Skill Generator
Description
«Slow Teacher's Field Literature Push Skill Generator» is an OpenClaw meta-skill designed specifically for researchers. Simply enter any research field (such as solid-state batteries, CO2RR, cryo-EM, AI agent evaluation, etc.), and it will automatically generate a complete, installable, dedicated literature push skill SKILL.md. This skill strictly follows Slow Teacher's high signal-to-noise principle, with built-in core teams (5–8 members) authentic to the field, an adaptive core journal pool (6–10 journals), precise keyword groups, and a critical reading baseline framework. The generated skill defaults to prioritizing high-quality literature from the previous day each day; if there are no new additions, it expands to the previous 7 days. Output is in the format of a «Slow Teacher Literature Push Card», helping you efficiently track mechanism debates and avoid being misled by flashy results. Truly, it's not about moving papers, but helping you follow a field long-term.
Related Skills
View allResearchGuided Literature Search
Search literature differently: this Skill gives you a “map of the field” first. It offers five standout capabilities: ① Reviews first, core papers second (a strict rule)—find 3–5 review articles to map the field, then follow their references to locate core literature, so you are not overwhelmed by hundreds of papers from the start; ② Literature authenticity verification (to prevent AI hallucinations)—uses placeholder-pattern checks and real-time verification through CrossRef, DOI, CNKI, and Wanfang, checking each author, journal, DOI, and page number without fabricating a single reference; ③ Automated advanced CSSCI searches on CNKI—when you have VPN or institutional access, automatically extract CSSCI records and abstracts, up to 100 papers at a time, and save them directly to Excel; ④ Direct English OA downloads—download directly from arXiv, MDPI, Frontiers, and other sources at 100%; download approximately 50–70% of Springer and Elsevier OA papers directly; for paywalled papers, receive a DOI link and VPN download instructions; ⑤ Topic selection with the Three-Circle Focus Method—intersect policy trends, your prior experience, and your problem awareness to turn a vague idea into a genuinely worthwhile research topic. The seven-step core workflow is: research topic design → keyword refinement → find reviews first → find core literature → screen and verify → attempt downloads → produce a prioritized reading list. It also includes two enhanced modules: a structured 12-element breakdown in Excel and iterative reflection after reading. Clear boundaries: it does not promise to bypass CNKI’s anti-scraping protections to download Chinese full texts, log in to a VPN on your behalf, or write the main body of your paper. Designed for graduate students, university faculty, and academic researchers who need to conduct systematic literature searches.
SCI Review Novelty Check – 慢老师
The 慢老师 SCI Review Novelty Check skill is an academic tool specially optimized for depth. It helps researchers systematically and accurately assess whether the innovation points of their own SCI review articles are sufficiently novel and unique, avoiding duplicate publication. The skill strictly follows Professor Slow's T+D Innovation Paradigm through a complete 4-step process: collect 6 core pieces of information from the manuscript, generate multi-dimensional search strategies in Chinese and English, real-time comparison with highly similar literature from the past 5 years, and output a professional report. Ultimately, it produces a complete Chinese report covering three major sections: [Overall Novelty Judgment], [Innovation Points and Unique Contributions], and [Potential Risks and Countermeasure Suggestions].
Literature Review Assistant
Writing a literature review is an inevitable challenge for graduate students—but turning information from 50 papers into a logically structured review, rather than a mere summary list, relies on methodology, not brute force. Tell it your research direction and the core papers you've already read. It first builds a framework—field map, thematic sorting, debates and gaps—then, after your confirmation, helps organize the language chapter by chapter. It doesn't write the paper for you, but helps you present the papers you've read with academic logic. ✨ Core Capabilities 1. Review framework generation: Introduction → Field map → Thematic sections → Debates and gaps → Outlook, standard academic structure 2. Field map: Sort domain development by timeline/school of thought, highlight milestone papers 3. In-depth thematic analysis: Individual paper introduction + intra-group comparison + overall contributions and limitations 4. Debate and gap analysis: At least 3 points of debate + 3 research gaps, with specific literature sources 5. Academic writing norms: Citation format, bilingual terminology, critical language rather than mere description 📱 Use Cases - Literature review chapter for graduate thesis/proposal writing - Related Work section of journal papers - Quick literature overview + structured notes when entering a new field - Used in combination with "论文速读笔记" and "论文双模研读" to form a "Read → Analyze → Synthesize" literature workflow ⚠️ Note: This skill does not perform real-time academic search. You need to provide information on papers you have already read (title/author/key points), and it helps you organize and write.
Find your next favorite skill
Explore more curated AI skills for research, creation, and everyday work.