map-literature-contradictions
From the author
Analyze conflicting findings in a literature review and turn disagreement into structured insight. Use when the user has papers, abstracts, notes, or claims that disagree and needs to identify consensus, explain contradictions by sample/method/indicator/context/time differences, define explanation boundaries, or write a stronger synthesis section.
Install
npx skills add xingtaxueshu/literature-review-skills --skill map-literature-contradictions -a claude-code
Installs to .claude/skills/map-literature-contradictions/ · Each command fetches the skill straight from GitHub with the open skills CLI.
Byte-identical to the scanned commit, with the repository’s licence and a SOURCE.txt.
Want your agent to suggest skills while you type? See how to use skills from your IDE.
Safety checks on SKILL.md
No warnings.
Why 78
aiqbench computes the trust score from public signals. It is not a security audit, so read a skill before you install it.
Similar skills
Closest to this one by what they do and when they are used.
- literature-reviewaipoch/open-scienceFind, verify, and synthesize scientific literature — from "what's the seminal paper for X" through full multi-source reviews. Covers grounding claims in real retrieved sources, avoiding fabricated citations, handling retractions, and calibrating confidence to evidence strength.Engineering★ 5.4K
- locate-review-research-gapxingtaxueshu/literature-review-skillsLocate a concrete, defensible research gap from a literature review synthesis and convert it into an executable future research direction. Use when the user is writing the conclusion, research outlook, thesis proposal significance, or contribution section and needs to avoid vague phrases like "more research is needed" by connecting question, modules, method limits, contradictions, and a specific next study.Science★ 65
- literature-review-plannertravisjneuman/.claudeStructured literature review planning with systematic methodology, source evaluation, and synthesis frameworks. Use when planning academic literature reviews, research surveys, systematic reviews, or scoping reviews.Planning★ 106
- literature-surveygaasher/Agent-Loop-SkillsUse when the user wants a structured, saturating literature survey on a question — not a one-shot summary, but an evidence/contradiction matrix (sources × claims) built by iterative search until coverage stops growing. Each round expands the search (new sub-topic queries plus citation-graph walks), admits new sources, extracts their claims with verbatim snippets, and records where every source stands on each claim (supports / contradicts / qualifies); the feedback signal is how many new matrix-changing sources a round adds, and it stops at saturation, patience, or budget. The output is the matrix plus a synthesis of consensus, disputes, and gaps, every cell backed by a real citation. Not for grading a written proposal against the literature (that is a proposal-evaluation task) and not for generating new hypotheses — this maps what the literature already says.Writing★ 177
- build-evidence-mapgithub/awesome-copilotBuild an auditable evidence map for a contested technical choice, research synthesis, proposal review, or consequential decision. Use when Copilot must preserve supporting, contradicting, qualifying, and missing evidence with exact source regions instead of collapsing disagreement into prose.Science★ 40.4K
- compare-research-methodsxingtaxueshu/literature-review-skillsCompare research methods for an academic literature review, thesis proposal, or methodology section by linking each method to what it can and cannot answer. Use when the user needs to justify method choice, compare quantitative/qualitative/mixed-method designs, build a methods table, or turn "I will use this method" into a defensible argument tied to the research question.Science★ 65
Ratings & reviews
—
no reviews
Tried this skill? Rate it to help others. Sign in
Discussion
Join the discussion. Sign in