scholar-evaluation
SolidSystematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.
Install
Quality Score: 94/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- foryourhealth111-pixel
- Repository
- foryourhealth111-pixel/Vibe-Skills
- Created
- 3 months ago
- Last Updated
- 1 weeks ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- Apache-2.0
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
scholar-evaluation
Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.
scholar-evaluation
Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and writing with quantitative scoring and actionable feedback.
scholar-evaluation
Apply the ScholarEval framework to systematically evaluate scholarly and research work. This skill provides structured evaluation methodology based on peer-reviewed research assessment criteria, en...
peer-review
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.
peer-review
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.