学术写作
4 个 · organized/repo_cards · 六阶段二十任务 · 方向综述 →
质量状态 Quality Gate
946已收录 946
36待复核 36
185已排除 185
公开榜单只展示已收录项目；待复核与已排除项目仍保留在仓库总库，不在此页传播。
研究阶段概览 Research Workflow
| # | 方向 | 数量 | 代表仓库 Top 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 研究执行 | 14 | Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar · OpenNSWM-Lab/FAROS · pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow |
| 02 | 投稿发表 | 2 | hx-paper/hxx-publication-figures · zoezizzoz/MIC60-publication-figures |
首次收录 近 14 天 · 按日期统计
2026-08-26
15
2026-08-25
26
2026-08-24
12
2026-08-23
46
2026-08-22
44
2026-08-21
48
2026-08-20
47
2026-08-19
45
2026-08-18
60
2026-08-17
44
2026-08-16
48
2026-08-15
53
2026-08-14
53
2026-08-13
59
仓库导航 Leaderboard
旧分类链接兼容
organized/repo_cards · 学术方向；旧书签仍可访问，新统计不再使用这些字段。
方向榜单 Legacy
| 学术综合写作 | 8 | OpenNSWM-Lab/FAROS · WenyuChiou/ai-research-skills · drshahizan/research-design |
| 其他学术工具 | 6 | pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow |
| 图表与可视化 | 2 |
01
OpenNSWM-Lab/FAROS
由蓝图驱动的 AutoResearch 运行时，用于编排 AI 科研工作流，涵盖创意生成、实验、论文写作与同行评审。A blueprint-driven AutoResearch runtime for orchestrating AI research workflows from idea generation and experiments to paper writing and peer review.
3,041 ★
02
pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow
一套开箱即用的 Claude Code 学术模板，基于 LaTeX/Beamer + R，支持多 Agent 评审、质量门禁、对抗式 QA 与复现协议。A ready-to-fork Claude Code template for academics using LaTeX/Beamer + R. Multi-agent review, quality gates, adversarial QA, and replication protocols.
1,527 ★
03
WenyuChiou/ai-research-skills
面向研究工作流的通用 SKILL.md 目录：覆盖文献综述、研究设计、项目记忆、稿件写作与跨 Agent 委托，兼容 Claude Code、Codex、Gemini、Cursor、OpenClaw 及通用 AI 客户端Universal SKILL.md catalog for research workflows: literature review, research design, project memory, manuscript writing, and cross-agent delegation for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, Cursor, OpenClaw, and generic AI clients.
+7/周
202 ★
04
drshahizan/research-design
本课程涵盖从初始想法到正式学术写作的开发流程与实现要点。学生将学习如何转化与消化文献综述，从而凝练出拟定的研究题目。This course will cover the fundamental steps and implementation on developing the initial ideas to formal academic writing accordingly. Students will be given the mechanisms on how to transform and digest the literature reviews that leads to the proposed title.
96 ★