Writing AI Paper
Overview
Transform scattered research notes into a top-conference-ready manuscript with strong novelty framing, rigorous evidence, and reviewer-friendly clarity.
Choose Working Mode
Select one mode before producing content:
- Build mode: generate sections from notes, logs, and result tables.
- Improve mode: rewrite existing sections for stronger argument flow and precision.
- Audit mode: output prioritized risks, missing evidence, and repair actions.
Collect Required Inputs
Collect these inputs first:
- target venue, track, deadline, and page/format limits
- one-sentence thesis claim and explicit non-claims
- 3-5 contributions with measurable success criteria
- datasets, baselines, metrics, and compute budget
- ablations, robustness tests, and failure cases
- reproducibility artifacts (code status, seed policy, config completeness)
- If venue is AR/VR/XR, also specify study modality (lab vs in-the-wild), interaction hardware, tracking stack, and cybersickness/comfort reporting plan
If critical inputs are absent, ask focused questions before drafting full text.
Top-Conference Workflow
- Frame contribution bar.
- Define why the problem matters now.
- State novelty against strongest nearby baselines.
- Scope claims to tested conditions only.
- Build claim-evidence map.
- Create a table linking each contribution to exact evidence.
- Reject contributions without direct empirical or theoretical support.
- Draft high-impact sections first.
- Draft Introduction and Experiments before Method details.
- Draft Method only after evaluation questions stabilize.
- Draft Abstract and title after core claims settle.
- Enforce experiment rigor.
- Ensure baseline fairness and hyperparameter transparency.
- Include multiple seeds or uncertainty reporting when applicable.
- Cover ablations, sensitivity, efficiency, and error analysis.
- Explain each major table/figure in prose.
- Enforce venue constraints.
- Fit page limits without hiding critical evidence.
- Verify anonymization and supplemental policy compliance.
- Align terminology with venue community expectations.
- Prepare rebuttal assets.
- Pre-build claim-to-evidence matrix.
- Pre-list likely reviewer objections and factual responses.
- Keep concise appendix pointers for disputed points.
Section Rules
Apply these rules when generating or rewriting:
- Introduction: problem stakes -> prior gap -> method intuition -> main evidence -> contribution bullets.
- Related Work: compare by approach families, not timeline.
- Method: explain design choices, assumptions, and complexity tradeoffs.
- Experiments: organize by evaluation questions, not by random table order.
- Conclusion: restate scope-limited takeaways and boundaries.
- AR/VR/XR papers: report interaction latency, tracking fidelity, device constraints, and user safety/comfort boundaries.
Quality Gates
Pass all gates before final output:
- novelty is explicit within first two paragraphs of Introduction
- each contribution is testable and evidenced
- claims remain consistent across Abstract, Intro, and Conclusion
- limitations are explicit and technically honest
- human-subject and AR/VR comfort risks are disclosed when applicable
- reviewer can identify the paper's delta in under two minutes
Output Contract
Always return:
- revised section text or full draft block
- high-severity risks first
- specific next-step checklist with fix priority
Resources
- Read
references/paper-writing-playbook.mdfor templates and submission workflows. - Read
references/top-conference-rubric.mdfor venue-level review expectations and final checks. - Read
references/ar-vr-xr-rubric.mdfor AR/VR/XR-specific venue expectations and study rigor checks. - Read
references/official-links.mdwhen user asks for official conference/CFP/author-guide URLs.
Scan to join WeChat group