anti-autoresearch
FeaturedEnd-to-end substantive-integrity forensic sweep of a research paper (especially autoresearch / AI-Scientist-style output). Orchestrates the whole pipeline: ingest (arxiv-id | pdf | dir → working dir + pdftotext for L0) → /evidence-ledger (artifact manifest + observability level L0/L1/L2 + span-anchored claims.json) → fan out the integrity auditor skills (consistency, citation, baseline, experiment, presentation, proof-derivation, eval-design — each reads the ledger, emits span-anchored findings) + the zero-verdict-weight AIS writing-style track → advisory memos (/adversarial-case-builder + /novelty-duplication-advisory, no verdict weight) → deterministic tools/adjudicate_findings.py (--ledger REQUIRED) → reviewer-ready Integrity Forensics Report. Cross-model (fresh codex per dimension) and reviewer≠adjudicator: the model proposes findings, the deterministic adjudicator decides the verdict. Observability-aware, detect-only, never an opaque AI-text classifier (a separate zero-weight AIS section lists AI writing
Install
Quality Score: 90/100
Skill Content
Details
- Author
- wanshuiyin
- Repository
- wanshuiyin/Anti-Autoresearch
- Created
- 2 months ago
- Last Updated
- 2 days ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
Integrates with
Similar Skills
Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category
integrity-forensics
Run the Anti-Autoresearch integrity-forensics sweep (span-anchored evidence ledger → GPT auditors propose findings → a rules-only reporter that lists every proposal with what the auditor said about it) against a paper via a SHA-pinned thin launcher — then convert the verdict into a typed policy gate (BLOCK/WARN/NO_NEW_BLOCKER) and an append-only obligations ledger. Use when user says "integrity forensics", "forensic audit this paper", "投稿前自查诚信", "审这篇论文的诚信", or says "anti-autoresearch" when the upstream repo's own skills are not installed. Also invoked by /paper-writing (submission self-forensics, default ON), /peer-review (forensic appendix), /resubmit-pipeline.
consistency-audit
Flagship intra-paper self-consistency forensics: does the paper contradict ITSELF across abstract/intro/tables/body/appendix, and does the method DESCRIBED match the method EVALUATED? Needs no external ground truth — works PDF-only (L0). Runs a deterministic arithmetic pass + a fresh cross-model semantic pass, every finding span-anchored to the evidence ledger (claims.json), reviewer≠adjudicator. Emits consistency-audit.findings.json; NEVER computes the verdict. Triggers: "consistency audit", "check the paper against itself", "self-consistency", "内部自洽".
experiment-forensics
Audit experiment integrity against the evidence ledger. At L2 (repo + result files present) a fresh cross-model reviewer reads the eval code line-by-line for fake/derived ground truth, score self-normalization, phantom results (a paper number with no backing file/key), dead/uncalled metric code, verified-scope inflation, method-described ≠ method-evaluated drift, synthesized-looking results, placeholder/fake data still wired into a released result, code-output ≠ reported-number mismatch, and missing reproducibility artifacts (an empirical/agent/LLM paper shipping neither code nor the prompts/configs its results need) — every finding span-anchored to a ledger claim_id. At L0/L1 (PDF / source only) the same patterns are surfaced as info-level 'could-not-verify' signals where the ledger gives an anchor (observability_level_required:2) — NEVER a fraud verdict from a PDF. The reviewer PROPOSES findings; tools/adjudicate_findings.py computes the verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "experiment forensics", "audit the res