scienceclaw-summarization

Files (1)

• SKILL.md

SKILL.md (first lines)

# scienceclaw-summarization

Summarize scientific papers, datasets, experimental results, and literature reviews with discipline-aware precision and faithful representation of source material.

## When to Use

- Condensing a full research paper into a structured abstract or brief summary
- Creating literature review summaries across multiple papers on a topic
- Summarizing experimental findings, including methods, results, and conclusions
- Synthesizing results from multiple studies for meta-analysis overviews
- Producing executive summaries of research for non-specialist audiences
- Distilling key takeaways from conference proceedings or preprint batches
- Generating comparative summaries across related studies

## When NOT to Use

- Extracting structured data points, entities, or relations from papers -- use `scienceclaw-ie`
- Retrieving or finding papers from databases -- use `scienceclaw-retrieval`
- Writing original research content, drafts, or manuscripts -- use `scienceclaw-generation`
- Answering specific factual questions about science -- use `scienceclaw-qa`
- Verifying claims or checking statistical validity -- use `scienceclaw-verification`

## Summary Types

### Abstract-Style Summary
A concise summary (150-300 words) that mirrors the structure of a scientific abstract:
1. **Background** -- one to two sentences of context and motivation
2. **Objective** -- the research question or hypothesis
3. **Methods** -- brief description of approach, dataset, or experimental design
4. **Results** -- key quantitative findings with effect sizes and confidence intervals where available
5. **Conclusion** -- main takeaway and implications

### Executive Summary
A high-level overview (300-500 words) aimed at decision-makers or non-specialists:
1. **Problem Statement** -- why this research matters
2. **Approach** -- what was done, in plain language
3. **Key Findings** -- the most impactful results, translated for a general audience
4. **Implications** -- practical significance and next steps
5. **Limitations** -- major caveats or open questions

### Detailed Summary
A thorough walkthrough (500-1500 words) preserving methodological detail:
1. **Introduction and Motivation** -- full context and prior work referenced
2. **Methods and Materials** -- detailed experimental or analytical design
3. **Results** -- comprehensive reporting of all major findings, tables, and figures described
4. **Discussion** -- interpretation, comparison with related work, alternative explanations
5. **Limitations and Future Work** -- weaknesses acknowledged by authors and beyond

### Systematic Review Summary
A structured synthesis across multiple papers:
1. **Search Strategy** -- how papers were identified and selected
2. **Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria** -- what qualified for the review
3. **Study Characteristics** -- table of included studies with key attributes
4. **Synthesized Findings** -- aggregated results, agreement and disagreement across studies
5. **Quality Assessment** -- risk of bias and evidence strength per study
6. **Gaps and Recommendations** -- what remains unanswered

## Discipline-Aware Terminology

Summaries must respect the vocabulary conventions of the source discipline:

- **Biomedical Sciences** -- use MESH terms, standard gene/protein nomenclature, clinical trial phase terminology, CONSORT-aligned reporting
- **Physics and Astronomy** -- preserve unit conventions (SI, CGS), uncertainty notation, standard model terminology
- **Computer Science** -- retain benchmark names, model architecture terms, dataset identifiers, metric abbreviations (F1, BLEU, ROUGE)
- **Chemistry** -- use IUPAC nomenclature, preserve reaction notation, maintain spectroscopic data references
- **Social Sciences** -- respect statistical reporting norms (APA style), effect size conventions, survey methodology terms
- **Earth and Environmental Sciences** -- preserve geospatial references, climate model identifiers, temporal scale descriptors

When summarizing across disciplines (interdisciplinary work), define domain-specific terms on first use and favor the terminology conventions of the primary discipline.

## Citation Handling

### In-Summary Citations
- Preserve author-year citations from the source when referencing specific claims: "(Smith et al., 2024)"
- When summarizing multiple papers, maintain consistent citation format throughout
- Use numbered references [1], [2] when summarizing more than ten sources for readability
- Always attribute quantitative claims to their source study

### Citation Integrity Rules
- Never fabricate citations -- if a referenced work cannot be confirmed, note it as "cited by authors, not independently verified"
- Preserve DOI links when available in the source material
- Flag retracted or corrected papers when encountered during summarization
- Distinguish between primary sources (original research) and secondary sources (reviews, textbooks)

### Reference List
- Append a reference list at the end of systematic review summaries and literature review summaries
- Use a consistent format (preferably matching the source discipline convention)
- Include DOIs where available

## Output Templates

### Single Paper Summary Template
```
Title: [Paper Title]
Authors: [Author List]
Source: [Journal/Preprint Server, Year]
DOI: [DOI if available]

Summary Type: [Abstract-Style | Executive | Detailed]

[Summary content organized by the selected type structure above]

Key Metrics: [Primary quantitative results]
Limitations Noted: [Major caveats]
```

### Multi-Paper Synthesis Template
```
Topic: [Research Topic]
Papers Reviewed: [Count]
Date Range: [Earliest -- Latest publication]

Synthesis Type: [Literature Review | Systematic Review | Meta-Analysis Overview]

[Synthesis content organized by the selected type structure above]

Agreement: [Points of consensus across studies]
Disagreement: [Points of conflict or contradiction]
Gaps: [Unanswered questions identified]

From beita6969/ScienceClaw, MIT.

More from beita6969/ScienceClaw