novelty-assessment

Assess research idea novelty through systematic literature search. Multi-round search-evaluate loops with harsh critic persona. Binary novel/not-novel decision with justification. Use before committing to a research direction.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "novelty-assessment" with this command: npx skills add lingzhi227/agent-research-skills/lingzhi227-agent-research-skills-novelty-assessment

Novelty Assessment

Rigorously assess whether a research idea is novel through systematic literature search.

Input

  • $0 — Research idea description, title, or JSON file

Scripts

Automated novelty check

python ~/.claude/skills/idea-generation/scripts/novelty_check.py \
  --idea "Your research idea description" \
  --max-rounds 10 --output novelty_report.json

Literature search

python ~/.claude/skills/deep-research/scripts/search_semantic_scholar.py \
  --query "relevant search query" --max-results 10

References

  • Assessment prompts and criteria: ~/.claude/skills/novelty-assessment/references/assessment-prompts.md

Workflow

Step 1: Understand the Idea

  • Identify the core contribution
  • List the key technical components
  • Determine the research area and subfield

Step 2: Multi-Round Literature Search (up to 10 rounds)

For each round:

  1. Generate a targeted search query
  2. Search Semantic Scholar / arXiv / OpenAlex
  3. Review top-10 results with abstracts
  4. Assess overlap with the idea
  5. Decide: need more searching, or ready to decide

Step 3: Make Decision

  • Novel: After sufficient searching, no paper significantly overlaps
  • Not Novel: Found a paper that significantly overlaps

Step 4: Position the Idea

If novel, identify:

  • Most similar existing papers (for Related Work)
  • How the idea differs from each
  • The specific gap this idea fills

Harsh Critic Persona

Be a harsh critic for novelty. Ensure there is a sufficient contribution
for a new conference or workshop paper. A trivial extension of existing
work is NOT novel. The idea must offer a meaningfully different approach,
formulation, or insight.

Output Format

{
  "decision": "novel" | "not_novel",
  "confidence": "high" | "medium" | "low",
  "justification": "After searching X rounds...",
  "most_similar_papers": [
    {"title": "...", "year": 2024, "overlap": "..."}
  ],
  "differentiation": "Our idea differs because..."
}

Rules

  • Minimum 3 search rounds before declaring novel
  • Try to recall exact paper names for targeted queries
  • A paper idea is NOT novel if it's a trivial extension
  • Consider both methodology novelty AND application novelty
  • Check for concurrent/recent arXiv submissions

Related Skills

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Research

literature-review

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Research

deep-research

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Research

literature-search

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Research

paper-revision

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review