Build a section-by-section claim–evidence matrix (`outline/claim_evidence_matrix.md`) from the outline and paper notes. **Trigger**: claim–evidence matrix, evidence mapping, 证据矩阵, 主张-证据对齐. **Use when**: 写 prose 之前需要把每个小节的可检验主张与证据来源显式化(outline + paper notes 已就绪)。 **Skip if**: 缺少 `outline/outline.yml` 或 `papers/paper_notes.jsonl`。 **Network**: none. **Guardrail**: bullets-only(NO PROSE);每个 claim 至少 2 个证据来源(或显式说明例外)。
Scanned 2/10/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add WILLOSCAR/research-units-pipeline-skills --skill claim-evidence-matrix --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Claim Evidence Matrix?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/willoscar-claim-evidence-matrix)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: claim-evidence-matrix
description: |
Build a section-by-section claim–evidence matrix (`outline/claim_evidence_matrix.md`) from the outline and paper notes.
**Trigger**: claim–evidence matrix, evidence mapping, 证据矩阵, 主张-证据对齐.
**Use when**: 写 prose 之前需要把每个小节的可检验主张与证据来源显式化(outline + paper notes 已就绪)。
**Skip if**: 缺少 `outline/outline.yml` 或 `papers/paper_notes.jsonl`。
**Network**: none.
**Guardrail**: bullets-only(NO PROSE);每个 claim 至少 2 个证据来源(或显式说明例外)。
---
# Claim–Evidence Matrix
Make the survey’s claims explicit and auditable **before** writing prose.
This should stay **bullets-only** (NO PROSE). The goal is to make later writing *easy* and to prevent “template prose” from sneaking in.
## Inputs
- `outline/outline.yml`
- `papers/paper_notes.jsonl`
- Optional: `outline/mapping.tsv`
## Output
- `outline/claim_evidence_matrix.md`
## Workflow (heuristic)
Uses: `outline/outline.yml`, `outline/mapping.tsv`.
1. For each subsection, write 1–3 claims that are:
- specific (mechanism / assumption / empirical finding)
- falsifiable (“X reduces tool errors under Y evaluation”, not “X is important”)
2. For each claim, list ≥2 evidence sources:
- prefer different styles of evidence (method paper + eval/benchmark paper, or two competing approaches)
3. Keep it tight: claim → evidence → (optional) caveat/limitations.
4. If evidence is weak or only abstract-level, say so explicitly (don’t overclaim).
5. If `bibkey` exists in `papers/paper_notes.jsonl`, include `[@BibKey]` next to evidence items to make later prose/LaTeX conversion smoother.
## Quality checklist
- [ ] Every subsection has ≥1 claim.
- [ ] Each claim lists ≥2 evidence sources (or an explicit exception).
- [ ] Claims are not copy-pasted templates (avoid “围绕…总结…” boilerplate).
## Helper script (optional)
### Quick Start
- `python .codex/skills/claim-evidence-matrix/scripts/run.py --help`
- `python .codex/skills/claim-evidence-matrix/scripts/run.py --workspace <workspace_dir>`
### All Options
- See `--help` (this helper is intentionally minimal)
### Examples
- Generate a first-pass matrix, then refine manually:
- Run the helper once, then refine `outline/claim_evidence_matrix.md` by tightening claims and adding caveats when evidence is abstract-level.
### Notes
- The helper generates a baseline matrix (claims + evidence) and never overwrites non-placeholder work; in `pipeline.py --strict` it will be blocked only if placeholder markers remain.
## Troubleshooting
### Issue: claims are generic or read like outline boilerplate
**Fix**:
- Tighten each claim to a falsifiable statement and add an explicit caveat if evidence is abstract-only.
### Issue: you cannot add `[@BibKey]` because keys are missing
**Fix**:
- Run `citation-verifier` to generate `citations/ref.bib`, then use the produced keys in the matrix.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!