Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

thesis-discussion-writer论文讨论作者

Agent Skill

thesis-discussion-writer 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

1,416

周安装

59

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

472
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:thesis-discussion-writer(论文讨论作者)
来源仓库:https://github.com/junwugit/thesis-discussion-writer
安装命令:
openclaw skills install thesis-discussion-writer
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install thesis-discussion-writer

简介

撰写中文学术论文讨论章节的专业辅助工具。

  • 适用于 OpenClaw 中的学位论文与研究写作。
  • 通过 clawhub 安装,支持严谨学术表达。
  • 聚焦研究局限、对比分析与未来展望。thesis-discussion-writer 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。
  • 使用时请确保引用规范与原创性声明合规。

SKILL.md

name
thesis-discussion-writer
description
Write detailed, academically rigorous Chinese discussion chapters or discussion sections for theses, dissertations, and undergraduate papers from a user's findings, research questions, hypotheses, themes, theoretical framework, literature review, limitations, implications, and extra information. Use when users ask to write, expand, polish, organize, or structure only the Discussion/Chapter Five/第五章讨论/总结与讨论/讨论与结论 section, including summary of the study, discussion of findings, theoretical and literature interpretation, unexpected results, practical implications, recommendations for future research, and conclusions.

Thesis Discussion Writer

Scope

Use this skill only to write the discussion part of a Chinese academic paper. The default output is a polished Chinese "第五章 讨论" or "第五章 总结、讨论与结论" section.

Do not write new results, methodology, literature review, questionnaire design, or full thesis chapters outside the discussion scope. The discussion chapter interprets results already reported elsewhere; it should not introduce new data, new statistical analyses, new interview excerpts, or unsupported conclusions.

Required Reference

Before drafting a full discussion chapter, read references/discussion-writing-guide.md. It contains chapter structures, finding-by-finding discussion rules, theory/literature integration patterns, implications, recommendations, conclusions, Chinese templates, and quality checks derived from the local 5discussion.txt source.

Input Extraction

Extract and use any information the user provides:

  • Thesis title, discipline, research problem, purpose, and chapter naming requirement
  • Research questions, hypotheses, variables, qualitative themes, cases, or mixed-methods strands
  • Main findings from the Results chapter, including significant and non-significant results
  • Theoretical framework, conceptual model, or epistemological framework
  • Prior studies or literature review points that should be compared with the findings
  • Method design, sample, instruments, data sources, and analysis limitations
  • Unexpected findings, possible explanations, confounding factors, mediators, or contextual factors
  • Practical audience: students, teachers, counselors, parents, managers, policymakers, institutions, or researchers
  • School requirements for sections such as "研究总结", "结果讨论", "实践启示", "研究不足与展望", and "结论"

If the user has not provided actual findings, do not invent conclusions, implications, literature comparisons, or recommendations. Provide a discussion-chapter framework with placeholders and a list of exact materials needed.

Discussion Type Decision

Infer the best discussion pattern before writing:

  • Quantitative: discuss each research question, hypothesis, variable, relationship, group difference, regression model, or non-significant result in the same order as the Results chapter.
  • Qualitative: discuss themes, cases, participant experiences, cross-case patterns, theoretical insights, and transferability while staying close to the qualitative data.
  • Mixed methods: discuss quantitative and qualitative findings separately or integrate them by research question, explaining convergence, divergence, and complementarity.
  • Literature review/systematic review: discuss evidence patterns, conceptual contributions, literature gaps, methodological limitations, and implications for future research.
  • Intervention-scheme design without implementation: discuss theoretical rationale, feasibility, expected application value, risk controls, evaluation plan, and limitations; do not claim effectiveness.

Drafting Workflow

  1. Identify the study type and the chapter format expected by the user's school.
  2. Start with a brief introduction/advance organizer for the discussion chapter.
  3. Summarize the study briefly: problem, purpose, framework, research questions/method, and major findings.
  4. Discuss findings one by one, following the same order as the Results chapter.
  5. For each finding, explain what it means, connect it to theory and literature, and state whether it supports, contradicts, or extends existing knowledge.
  6. Explain unexpected or weak results through sampling, instrumentation, research design, context, or unmeasured variables when evidence permits.
  7. Derive practical implications directly from findings and match them to concrete stakeholders.
  8. Derive future research recommendations from findings, limitations, unanswered questions, and methodological constraints.
  9. End with conclusions that make defensible assertions based on the findings, without adding new data.

Output Standards

For a full discussion chapter, include:

  • Complete Chinese draft with numbered headings
  • A short study summary when the requested chapter includes it
  • Finding-by-finding discussion organized by research question, hypothesis, variable, theme, case, or model
  • Integration with theory and literature when the user supplies enough context
  • Explanation of unexpected findings and plausible limitations when relevant
  • Practical implications grounded in results
  • Recommendations for future research grounded in results and limitations
  • Conclusions that synthesize the whole study

Quality requirements:

  • Stay close to the data.
  • Do not overgeneralize beyond the sample, data source, method, or design.
  • Do not repeat technical statistics already reported in the Results chapter unless needed for clarity.
  • Do not turn recommendations into unsupported claims.
  • Do not write implications that are broader than the findings can support.
  • Do not introduce new analyses or new evidence in the Discussion chapter.
  • Preserve limitations and uncertainty instead of forcing strong conclusions.

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

OpenClaw

70.44%
按下载量换算332

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills