`research-survey`¶

Survey/literature review generation

Pack: EvoSkills

Category: literature

Field: —

License: Apache-2.0

Updated: 2026-05-17

Stages: literature-discovery · literature-synthesis

↗ view SKILL.md on source · GitHub stars

Research Survey¶

Generates high-quality, survey-grade literature reviews from papers collected by paper-navigator.

Text Only

paper-navigator (collect 30-120 papers)
    ↓
Stage 1: Generate Outline (query-type adaptive structure)
    ↓
Stage 2: Draft Survey (outline + top-30 papers)
    ↓
Stage 3: Expand Sections (draft + all papers, section-by-section)
    ↓
Stage 4: Generate Section Summaries
    ↓
Stage 5: Refine Summary Sections (Abstract/Intro/Conclusion)
    ↓
Stage 6: Assemble + References

When to Use¶

User asks for a "literature review", "survey", "field overview", or "systematic review"
User has collected papers and wants them synthesized into a structured report
User wants to understand the full landscape of a research field

When NOT to Use¶

Finding papers → use paper-navigator first, then come here
Generating research ideas → use research-ideation
Writing a Related Work section for a paper → use paper-writing

Dependency: paper-navigator¶

This skill requires papers as input. If the user hasn't provided papers, first invoke paper-navigator (Workflow 1, target 30-120 papers) to collect them.

CRITICAL: All paper discovery MUST use the paper-navigator skill and its scripts (scholar_search, citation_traverse, arxiv_monitor, recommend, etc.). Using WebSearch, WebFetch, or any generic web search tool for finding papers is PROHIBITED. Generic web search cannot access Semantic Scholar, citation graphs, or academic recommendation systems. Only paper-navigator provides the academic search infrastructure needed for survey-quality literature collection.

Stage 1: Generate Outline¶

This is a two-phase process. Different fields have different survey conventions — a clinical systematic review looks nothing like a CS methods survey. First generate a domain-appropriate template, then create the detailed outline.

Phase 1A: Generate Domain-Specific Survey Template¶

Before outlining, identify the field and adapt the structure:

Identify the field from the user's goal and collected papers
Select section names and organization logic using the field-specific conventions in assets/survey-template.md (e.g., medicine organizes by intervention type and follows PRISMA; chemistry organizes by reaction class; social sciences organize by theoretical perspective)
Add field-specific sections (e.g., Risk of Bias Assessment for medicine, Structure-Property Relationships for materials, Ethical Considerations for human-subjects research)
Determine comparison table dimensions appropriate to the field

Phase 1B: Create Detailed Outline¶

With the domain-specific template as the framework, generate the outline:

Query Type Classification¶

Type	Example	Structure
A: Single-topic deep dive	"Catalyst design for electrochemical CO2 reduction"	Intro → Problem Definition → Methods (by mechanism/approach) → Evaluation → Challenges → Conclusion
B: Multi-topic parallel	"Drug resistance mechanisms and therapeutic strategies in cancer immunotherapy"	Intro → Topic 1 (definition + methods) → Topic 2 (definition + methods) → Evaluation → Challenges → Conclusion
C: Pipeline/stage-based	"From sample preparation to data analysis in single-cell RNA sequencing"	Chapters organized by workflow stages

Outline Requirements¶

The outline is NOT a simple heading list — it's a blueprint with meta-instructions for each section. For each ## Section:

Include [Instruction: ...] specifying what the section must contain
Specify required tables with field-appropriate columns
For main body sections: mandate taxonomy by underlying principle/mechanism, NOT chronology
Include any field-required elements (e.g., PRISMA flowchart for medical systematic reviews, mathematical formalism for physics)

See references/survey-methodology.md for full outline generation rules and assets/survey-template.md for field-specific conventions.

Stage 2: Draft Survey¶

Generate a complete draft from the outline using the top-30 most relevant papers.

Use numbered citations [1], [2, 3] throughout
Follow the outline's meta-instructions strictly
Each methods section must build a taxonomy and include comparison tables
Problem definition must include LaTeX formalization ($$...$$)

Stage 3: Expand Sections¶

Expand each non-summary section using all collected papers (30-120). This is where survey-grade depth is achieved.

Section Expansion Targets¶

Section Type	Target Length	Focus
Methods	6000+ words per paradigm chapter	Technical narratives, mechanism analysis, comparison tables
Evaluation	3500+ words	Benchmark taxonomy, metric analysis, SOTA summary
Challenges	3000+ words	Problem definition + evidence + opportunity per challenge
Applications	3000+ words	Real-world use cases with specific achievements
Problem Definition	2000+ words	LaTeX formalization, constraints, assumptions
Other	2500+ words	Default

Expansion Rules¶

Thematic coherence: Keep same themes and narrative flow as draft — don't introduce unrelated topics
Cite comprehensively: Use as many relevant papers from the full collection as possible
Survey-grade depth: Multi-paragraph technical narratives per method family, not shallow bullet points
For each paradigm/method family, include:
Technical narrative: How it works, theoretical assumptions, nuances between papers
Critical analysis: Why effective, trade-offs, failure modes
Comparative analysis table: Method | Core Mechanism | Key Advantage | Limitation | Performance

Stage 4: Generate Section Summaries¶

After all content sections are expanded, generate a condensed summary for each major section:

Summarize each expanded section in 150-300 words
Preserve the key taxonomy, representative methods, and main trade-offs
Keep citation anchors so later summary sections remain grounded

These section summaries become the shared context for the final abstract, introduction, and conclusion.

Stage 5: Refine Summary Sections¶

After all content sections are expanded, refine the summary sections (Abstract, Introduction, Conclusion):

Use all section summaries as context to rewrite Abstract, Introduction, Conclusion
This ensures summary sections accurately reflect the full survey content

Summary Section Standards¶

Abstract (300-500 words): - Continuous narrative, NO bullet points or bold labels - Must cover: background → gap → scope → key findings → outlook

Introduction: - Continuous narrative, NO subsections or bullet points - Must cover: research background → why traditional methods fail → method summary → scope & organization

Conclusion: - Summarize findings, state which paradigm is most promising - Respond to user's original research goal - Provide clear "next step" recommendation

Stage 6: Assemble Final Survey¶

Assemble sections in outline order, then append formatted references: