dsh-aris-panel 0.1.0

package/skills/paper-plan/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,386 @@
+---
+name: paper-plan
+description: "Generate a structured paper outline from review conclusions and experiment results. Use when user says \"写大纲\", \"paper outline\", \"plan the paper\", \"论文规划\", or wants to create a paper plan before writing."
+argument-hint: "[topic-or-narrative-doc] [— style-ref: <source>]"
+allowed-tools: Bash(*), Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, WebSearch, WebFetch, mcp__codex__codex, mcp__codex__codex-reply
+---
+
+# Paper Plan: From Review Conclusions to Paper Outline
+
+Generate a structured, section-by-section paper outline from: **$ARGUMENTS**
+
+## Constants
+
+- **REVIEWER_MODEL = `gpt-5.6-sol`** — Model used via Codex MCP for outline review. Must be an OpenAI model.
+- **TARGET_VENUE = `ICLR`** — Default venue. User can override (e.g., `/paper-plan "topic" — venue: NeurIPS`). Supported: `ICLR`, `NeurIPS`, `ICML`, `CVPR`, `ACL`, `AAAI`, `ACM`, `IEEE_JOURNAL` (IEEE Transactions / Letters), `IEEE_CONF` (IEEE conferences).
+- **MAX_PAGES** — Page limit. For ML conferences: main body to Conclusion end (excluding references, appendix). ICLR=9, NeurIPS=9, ICML=8, AAAI=7 technical-content pages plus references unless the current AAAI CFP says otherwise. **For IEEE venues: references ARE included in page count.** IEEE journal Transactions ≈ 12-14 pages total, Letters ≈ 4-5 pages total; IEEE conference ≈ 5-8 pages total (including references).
+
+## Inputs
+
+The skill expects one or more of these in the project directory:
+
+1. **NARRATIVE_REPORT.md** or **STORY.md** — research narrative with claims and evidence
+2. **review-stage/AUTO_REVIEW.md** — auto-review loop conclusions *(fall back to `./AUTO_REVIEW.md` if not found)*
+3. **Experiment results** — JSON files in `figures/`, screen logs, tables
+4. **idea-stage/IDEA_REPORT.md** — from idea-discovery pipeline (if applicable) *(fall back to `./IDEA_REPORT.md` if not found)*
+5. **Compact files** (if available): `idea-stage/IDEA_CANDIDATES.md` *(fall back to `./IDEA_CANDIDATES.md` if not found)*, `findings.md`, `EXPERIMENT_LOG.md` — preferred over full files when present, saves context window
+
+If none exist, ask the user to describe the paper's contribution in 3-5 sentences.
+
+## Orchestra-Guided Writing Overlay
+
+Keep the existing `insleep` workflow and outputs, but use the shared references below to improve the quality of the story and outline.
+
+- Read `../shared-references/writing-principles.md` when framing the one-sentence contribution, Abstract, Introduction, Related Work, or hero figure.
+- Read `../shared-references/venue-checklists.md` before freezing the outline for a specific venue.
+- Only load these references when needed; do not paste their full contents into the working draft.
+
+## Optional: Style reference (`— style-ref: <source>`, opt-in)
+
+Lets the user steer the **structural** layout of the outline (section ordering, subsection density, theorem-environment density, figure budget, citation style) toward a reference paper. **Default OFF — when the user does not pass `— style-ref`, do nothing differently from before.**
+
+Only when `— style-ref: <source>` appears in `$ARGUMENTS`, run the helper FIRST, before drafting the outline:
+
+```bash
+# Resolve $STYLE_HELPER via the canonical strict-safe chain (see
+# shared-references/integration-contract.md §2). Policy A — gate:
+# unresolved helper means --style-ref cannot be satisfied, so abort.
+cd "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)" || exit 1
+if [ -z "${ARIS_REPO:-}" ] && [ -f .aris/installed-skills.txt ]; then
+    ARIS_REPO=$(awk -F'\t' '$1=="repo_root"{print $2; exit}' .aris/installed-skills.txt 2>/dev/null) || true
+fi
+if [ -z "${ARIS_REPO:-}" ] && [ -f "$HOME/.aris/repo" ]; then
+    ARIS_REPO=$(cat "$HOME/.aris/repo" 2>/dev/null) || true
+fi
+STYLE_HELPER=".aris/tools/extract_paper_style.py"
+[ -f "$STYLE_HELPER" ] || STYLE_HELPER="tools/extract_paper_style.py"
+[ -f "$STYLE_HELPER" ] || { [ -n "${ARIS_REPO:-}" ] && STYLE_HELPER="$ARIS_REPO/tools/extract_paper_style.py"; }
+[ -f "$STYLE_HELPER" ] || {
+  echo "ERROR: extract_paper_style.py not resolved at .aris/tools/, tools/, \$ARIS_REPO/tools/, or via ~/.aris/repo." >&2
+  echo "       Fix: rerun bash tools/install_aris.sh or smart_update.sh (refreshes ~/.aris/repo), export ARIS_REPO, or copy the helper to tools/." >&2
+  echo "       --style-ref cannot be satisfied; aborting." >&2
+  exit 1
+}
+STYLE_STATUS=0
+CACHE=$(python3 "$STYLE_HELPER" --source "<source>") || STYLE_STATUS=$?
+case "$STYLE_STATUS" in
+  0) ;;                                       # use $CACHE/style_profile.md as structural guidance
+  2) echo "warning: style-ref skipped (missing optional dep)" >&2 ;;
+  3) echo "error: --style-ref source failed; aborting outline" >&2 ; exit 1 ;;
+  *) echo "error: helper failed unexpectedly; aborting outline" >&2 ; exit 1 ;;
+esac
+```
+
+Sources accepted: local TeX dir / file, local PDF, arXiv id (`2501.12345` or `arxiv:2501.12345`), http(s) URL. Overleaf URLs and project IDs are rejected — clone via `/overleaf-sync setup <id>` first and pass the local clone path.
+
+**Strict rules** (full contract in `tools/extract_paper_style.py` docstring):
+
+- Use `style_profile.md` as **structural** guidance only when proposing the outline's section list, subsection counts, theorem density, figure budget.
+- **Never copy prose, claims, examples, section names verbatim, or terminology** from anything reachable through the cache. The user's narrative is the only source of substance.
+- **Never pass `— style-ref` (or the cache contents) to reviewer / auditor sub-agents.** Cross-model review independence (`../shared-references/reviewer-independence.md`) requires reviewers see only the artifact and the user's prompt.
+
+### Gap Report (`GAP_REPORT.md`, auto-emitted when style-ref is on)
+
+When `— style-ref:` succeeded AND any of `figures/`, `results/`, `data/`, `tables/`, `sec/`, `NARRATIVE_REPORT.md`, `CLAIMS_FROM_RESULTS.md` exists in the project, **also** emit a gap report before drafting the outline. The gap report maps the exemplar's section topology + density requirements (from `style_profile.md`) against the user's actual assets, surfacing structural slots where the user has **no evidence to fill**. It is the contract by which `/paper-write` decides when to emit `<!-- DATA_NEEDED -->` markers instead of fabricating content.
+
+Procedure:
+
+1. Read `$CACHE/style_profile.md` for exemplar's section list + per-section feature counts (figures, theorems, tables, citations, sentences per section).
+2. Inventory user assets: `figures/*` filenames, `results/*` evidence files, `sec/*.tex` existing prose, `NARRATIVE_REPORT.md`, `CLAIMS_FROM_RESULTS.md` (if `/result-to-claim` ran), `references.bib` for citation density.
+3. For each section slot the exemplar implies (ablation table, scaling experiment, failure-case analysis, proof block, …), classify as `covered` / `partial` / `missing`.
+4. Emit `<output-dir>/GAP_REPORT.md`:
+
+```markdown
+# GAP_REPORT — exemplar vs user assets
+
+- **Exemplar source:** <source identifier (file path, arXiv ID, URL)>
+- **Generated:** <UTC ISO-8601>
+- **Style profile:** <relative path to style_profile.md>
+
+## Section topology gaps
+
+| Exemplar slot | Exemplar feature | User evidence | Status | Slot ID |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| §5 Experiments | ablation table (3 axes × 4 levels) | `results/` has no ablation file | missing | `GAP_S5_ABLATION` |
+| §5.3 Scaling | log-N scaling curve | `figures/scaling.pdf` not found | missing | `GAP_S5_SCALING` |
+| §6 Discussion | failure-case analysis | not present in `NARRATIVE_REPORT.md` | missing | `GAP_S6_FAILURE` |
+| §2 Related | citation density ≥ 60 | `references.bib` has 35 entries | partial | `GAP_S2_CITES` |
+
+## Coverage summary
+
+- covered: N
+- partial: M
+- missing: K
+
+## Used by
+
+- `/paper-write` reads this file and emits `<!-- DATA_NEEDED: <Slot ID> — <one-line description> -->` placeholders for `missing` slots instead of fabricating content.
+- `/paper-claim-audit` can use Slot IDs to flag claims that cite sections with `missing` evidence.
+```
+
+Slot ID format: `GAP_<SECTION>_<FEATURE>`, all-caps, stable across regenerations unless user assets change.
+
+**Rules** (hard):
+
+- **Do not** infer, fill, or hallucinate evidence to "close" gaps. Missing is missing.
+- **Do not** propose specific experiment commands to fill gaps — that is `/experiment-bridge`'s job. Gap Report just surfaces deficits.
+- **Do not** include exemplar prose / claim text / author names / quantitative figures from the exemplar.
+- If `style_profile.md` extraction failed or the user has no project assets, skip Gap Report (no error; just do not emit the file).
+- The gap report is **also subject to reviewer isolation** — never passed to reviewer / auditor sub-agents (same rule as `style_profile.md`).
+
+Original idea: @zhangpelf in [#217](https://github.com/wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep/issues/217).
+
+## Workflow
+
+### Step 1: Extract Claims and Evidence
+
+**First check for `CLAIMS_FROM_RESULTS.md`** — if its first line is `verdict: REVIEW_UNAVAILABLE`, treat the file as ABSENT for claim extraction (fall through to the narrative documents below) and then: under `— assurance: submission` (`shared-references/assurance-contract.md`; implied by `— effort: max|beast`) STOP — the claims were never adjudicated, rerun `/result-to-claim` first; under `assurance: draft` continue but tag every claim `[unadjudicated]` in the claims matrix. Otherwise, if it exists (generated by `/result-to-claim` at the end of Workflow 2), use it as the starting point for claims. This file contains validated claims already mapped to experiment evidence. Merge with any additional claims from the narrative documents below.
+
+If `CLAIMS_FROM_RESULTS.md` does not exist, extract claims from scratch:
+
+Read all available narrative documents and extract:
+
+1. **Core claims** (3-5 main contributions)
+2. **One-sentence contribution** (the single sentence that best states what the paper contributes)
+3. **Evidence** for each claim (which experiments, which metrics, which figures)
+4. **Known weaknesses** (from reviewer feedback)
+5. **Suggested framing** (from review conclusions)
+
+Build a **Claims-Evidence Matrix**:
+
+```markdown
+| Claim | Evidence | Status | Section |
+|-------|----------|--------|---------|
+| [claim 1] | [exp A, metric B] | Supported | §3.2 |
+| [claim 2] | [exp C] | Partially supported | §4.1 |
+```
+
+### Step 2: Determine Paper Type and Structure
+
+Based on TARGET_VENUE and paper content, classify and select structure.
+
+Before committing to a structure, apply the narrative principle from `../shared-references/writing-principles.md`:
+
+- The paper should tell one coherent technical story.
+- By the end of the Introduction, the outline should make the **What**, **Why**, and **So What** explicit.
+- Front-load the most important material: title, abstract, introduction, and hero figure. Reviewers often form a judgment before reading the full method.
+
+**IMPORTANT**: The section count is FLEXIBLE (5-8 sections). Choose what fits the content best. The templates below are starting points, not rigid constraints.
+
+**Empirical/Diagnostic paper:**
+```
+1. Introduction (1.5 pages)
+2. Related Work (1 page)
+3. Method / Setup (1.5 pages)
+4. Experiments (3 pages)
+5. Analysis / Discussion (1 page)
+6. Conclusion (0.5 pages)
+```
+
+**Theory + Experiments paper:**
+```
+1. Introduction (1.5 pages)
+2. Related Work (1 page)
+3. Preliminaries & Modeling (1.5 pages)
+4. Experiments (1.5 pages)
+5. Theory Part A (1.5 pages)
+6. Theory Part B (1.5 pages)
+7. Conclusion (0.5 pages)
+— Total: 9 pages
+```
+Theory papers often need 7 sections (splitting theory into estimation + optimization, or setup + analysis). The total page budget MUST sum to MAX_PAGES.
+
+Theory papers should:
+- Include **proof sketch** locations (not just theorem statements)
+- Plan a **comparison table** of prior theoretical bounds vs. this paper's bounds
+- Identify which proofs go in appendix vs. main body
+
+**Method paper:**
+```
+1. Introduction (1.5 pages)
+2. Related Work (1 page)
+3. Method (2 pages)
+4. Experiments (2.5 pages)
+5. Ablation / Analysis (1 page)
+6. Conclusion (0.5 pages)
+```
+
+### Step 3: Section-by-Section Planning
+
+For each section, specify:
+
+```markdown
+### §0 Abstract
+- **What we achieve**: [the paper's specific contribution, not field-level background]
+- **Why it matters / is hard**: [why this problem is important and non-trivial]
+- **How we do it**: [approach in one sentence]
+- **Evidence**: [what supports the claim]
+- **Most remarkable result**: [strongest quantitative or theoretical result]
+- **Estimated length**: 150-250 words
+- **Self-contained check**: can a reader understand this without the paper?
+
+### §1 Introduction
+- **Opening hook**: [1-2 sentences that motivate the problem]
+- **Gap / challenge**: [what's missing in prior work, and why prior work is insufficient]
+- **One-sentence contribution**: [the main takeaway of the paper]
+- **Approach overview**: [what we do differently]
+- **Key questions**: [the research questions this paper answers]
+- **Contributions**: [2-4 numbered bullets, specific and falsifiable, matching Claims-Evidence Matrix]
+- **Results preview**: [the strongest result or comparison to surface early]
+- **Hero figure**: [describe what Figure 1 should show — MUST include clear comparison if applicable]
+- **Estimated length**: 1.5 pages
+- **Key citations**: [3-5 papers to cite here]
+- **Front-loading check**: [would a skim reader know the main claim before reaching the method?]
+
+### §2 Related Work
+- **Subtopics**: [2-4 categories of related work]
+- **Positioning**: [how this paper differs from each category]
+- **Minimum length**: 1 full page (at least 3-4 paragraphs with substantive synthesis)
+- **Organization rule**: organize by methodological family / assumption / question, not paper-by-paper
+- **Must NOT be just a list** — synthesize, compare, and position
+
+### §3 Method / Setup / Preliminaries
+- **Notation**: [key symbols and their meanings]
+- **Problem formulation**: [formal setup]
+- **Method description**: [algorithm, model, or experimental design]
+- **Formal statements**: [theorems, propositions if applicable]
+- **Proof sketch locations**: [which key steps appear here vs. appendix]
+- **Estimated length**: 1.5-2 pages
+
+### §4 Experiments / Main Results
+- **Figures planned**:
+  - Fig 1: [description, type: bar/line/table/architecture, WHAT COMPARISON it shows]
+  - Fig 2: [description]
+  - Table 1: [what it shows, which methods/baselines compared]
+- **Data source**: [which JSON files / experiment results]
+
+### §5 Conclusion
+- **Restatement**: [contributions rephrased, not copy-pasted from intro]
+- **Limitations**: [honest assessment — reviewers value this]
+- **Future work**: [1-2 concrete directions]
+- **Estimated length**: 0.5 pages
+```
+
+### Step 4: Figure Plan
+
+List every figure and table:
+
+```markdown
+## Figure Plan
+
+| ID | Type | Description | Data Source | Priority |
+|----|------|-------------|-------------|----------|
+| Fig 1 | Hero/Architecture | System overview + comparison | manual | HIGH |
+| Fig 2 | Line plot | Training curves comparison | figures/exp_A.json | HIGH |
+| Fig 3 | Bar chart | Ablation results | figures/ablation.json | MEDIUM |
+| Table 1 | Comparison table | Main results vs. baselines | figures/main_results.json | HIGH |
+| Table 2 | Theory comparison | Prior bounds vs. ours | manual | HIGH (theory papers) |
+```
+
+**CRITICAL for Figure 1 / Hero Figure**: Describe in detail what the figure should contain, including:
+- Which methods are being compared
+- What the visual difference should demonstrate
+- Caption draft that clearly states the comparison
+- Why the figure helps a skim reader understand the paper before reading the full method
+
+### Step 5: Citation Scaffolding
+
+For each section, list required citations:
+
+```markdown
+## Citation Plan
+- §1 Intro: [paper1], [paper2], [paper3] (problem motivation)
+- §2 Related: [paper4]-[paper10] (categorized by subtopic)
+- §3 Method: [paper11] (baseline), [paper12] (technique we build on)
+```
+
+**Citation rules** (from claude-scholar + Imbad0202/academic-research-skills):
+1. NEVER generate BibTeX from memory — always verify via search or existing .bib files
+2. Every citation must be verified: correct authors, year, venue
+3. Flag any citation you're unsure about with `[VERIFY]`
+4. Prefer published versions over arXiv preprints when available
+
+### Step 6: Cross-Review with REVIEWER_MODEL
+
+Send the complete outline to GPT-5.6-Sol xhigh for feedback:
+
+```
+mcp__codex__codex:
+  model: gpt-5.6-sol
+  config: {"model_reasoning_effort": "xhigh"}
+  prompt: |
+    Review this paper outline for a [VENUE] submission.
+    [full outline including Claims-Evidence Matrix]
+
+    Score 1-10 on:
+    1. Logical flow — does the story build naturally?
+    2. Claim-evidence alignment — every claim backed?
+    3. Missing experiments or analysis
+    4. Positioning relative to prior work
+    5. Page budget feasibility (MAX_PAGES = main body to Conclusion end, excluding refs/appendix)
+    6. Front-matter strength — are the abstract, introduction, and hero figure plan strong enough for skim-reading reviewers?
+
+    For each weakness, suggest the MINIMUM fix.
+    Be specific and actionable — "add X" not "consider more experiments".
+```
+
+Apply feedback before finalizing.
+
+### Step 7: Output
+
+Save the final outline to `PAPER_PLAN.md` in the project root:
+
+```markdown
+# Paper Plan
+
+**Title**: [working title]
+**One-sentence contribution**: [single-sentence statement of the paper's core takeaway]
+**Venue**: [target venue]
+**Type**: [empirical/theory/method]
+**Date**: [today]
+**Page budget**: [MAX_PAGES] pages (main body to Conclusion end, excluding references & appendix)
+**Section count**: [N] (must match the number of section files that will be created)
+
+## Claims-Evidence Matrix
+[from Step 1]
+
+## Structure
+[from Step 2-3, section by section]
+
+## Figure Plan
+[from Step 4, with detailed hero figure description]
+
+## Citation Plan
+[from Step 5]
+
+## Reviewer Feedback
+[from Step 6, summarized]
+
+## Next Steps
+- [ ] /paper-figure to generate all figures
+- [ ] /paper-write to draft LaTeX
+- [ ] /paper-compile to build PDF
+```
+
+## Key Rules
+- **Large file handling**: If the Write tool fails due to file size, immediately retry using Bash (`cat << 'EOF' > file`) to write in chunks. Do NOT ask the user for permission — just do it silently.
+- **Do NOT generate author information** — leave author block as placeholder or anonymous
+- **Be honest about evidence gaps** — mark claims as "needs experiment" rather than overclaiming
+- **Page budget is hard** — if content exceeds MAX_PAGES, suggest what to move to appendix
+- **MAX_PAGES counting differs by venue** — ML conferences: main body to Conclusion end, references/appendix NOT counted; AAAI main track is typically 7 technical-content pages plus references. **IEEE venues: references ARE counted toward the page limit.**
+- **Venue-specific norms** — ML conferences (ICLR/NeurIPS/ICML) use `natbib` (`\citep`/`\citet`); **IEEE venues use `cite` package (`\cite{}`, numeric style)**
+- **Claims-Evidence Matrix is the backbone** — every claim must map to evidence, every experiment must support a claim
+- **Front-load the story** — the outline should make the contribution clear in the title, abstract, introduction, and hero figure before the reader reaches the full method
+- **Figures need detailed descriptions** — especially the hero figure, which must clearly specify comparisons and visual expectations
+- **Section count is flexible** — 5-8 sections depending on paper type. Don't force content into a rigid 5-section template.
+
+## Acknowledgements
+
+Outline methodology inspired by [Research-Paper-Writing-Skills](https://github.com/Master-cai/Research-Paper-Writing-Skills) (claim-evidence mapping), [claude-scholar](https://github.com/Galaxy-Dawn/claude-scholar) (citation verification), and [Imbad0202/academic-research-skills](https://github.com/Imbad0202/academic-research-skills) (claim verification protocol). The writing-framing overlay in this hybrid pack is adapted from Orchestra Research's paper-writing guidance.
+
+## Output Protocols
+
+> Follow these shared protocols for all output files:
+> - **[Output Versioning Protocol](../shared-references/output-versioning.md)** — write timestamped file first, then copy to fixed name
+> - **[Output Manifest Protocol](../shared-references/output-manifest.md)** — log every output to MANIFEST.md
+> - **[Output Language Protocol](../shared-references/output-language.md)** — respect the project's language setting

package/skills/paper-poster/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+---
+name: paper-poster
+description: "DEPRECATED — superseded by /paper-poster-html. Kept only as a redirect for muscle memory; do not use for new posters."
+argument-hint: "[paper-dir-or-pdf]"
+allowed-tools: Read
+---
+
+# Paper Poster (DEPRECATED → /paper-poster-html)
+
+This skill is retired. The LaTeX/tcbposter pipeline it described produced posters with
+unbounded color palettes, no real paper figures, and no print-canvas verification, and
+has been replaced by the measurement-gated HTML/CSS pipeline.
+
+**Immediately proceed with `/paper-poster-html`**, passing through all of the user's
+arguments unchanged. Do not attempt the legacy LaTeX flow.
+
+The full legacy implementation remains available in git history
+(`git log -- skills/paper-poster/SKILL.md`) if a venue ever mandates LaTeX poster
+source — none is known to.

package/skills/paper-poster-html/DESIGN_FINAL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,176 @@
+# paper-poster-html — 收敛后的最终设计(codex 3 轮讨论产物)
+
+日期:2026-06-05。讨论 thread:019e96dc-8350-70f0-a595-c1ad15919aa8(gpt-5.5 xhigh)。
+状态:Round 2 全点收敛,本文档为实现规格。
+
+## 0. 定位
+
+- HTML+CSS 是新的默认 poster 路径;旧 `/paper-poster`(LaTeX tcbposter)已退役为
+  重定向 stub(2026-06-07 落库决定,较本规格的 legacy 共存方案更进一步;
+  旧实现仅存于 git history)。
+- posterly(MIT, github.com/Chenruishuo/posterly)的 tools **vendor 进 skill**,不外部依赖
+  不重写;`LICENSES/posterly-MIT.txt` + `NOTICE.md` 注明来源与 ARIS 修改。
+
+## 1. 目录布局
+
+```
+skills/paper-poster-html/
+├── SKILL.md
+├── LICENSES/posterly-MIT.txt
+├── NOTICE.md
+├── templates/
+│   ├── README.md
+│   ├── COMPONENTS.md          # 组件契约目录(Q6)
+│   ├── landscape_4col.html    # fork 自 posterly,de-gradient + token 化
+│   ├── landscape_hero.html
+│   ├── portrait_2col.html
+│   └── tokens/
+│       ├── generic.json       # 默认:slate-blue #2D5F8B + gold #C9A24A
+│       ├── iclr.json … cvpr.json   # opt-in venue 包
+└── scripts/
+    ├── poster_check.py        # vendored(measure/preflight/polish/verify-final)
+    ├── render_preview.py      # vendored(Playwright print render)
+    ├── _posterly/…            # vendored 内部模块
+    ├── style_check.py         # 新:风格硬门(12 条规则)
+    ├── asset_check.py         # 新:真图溯源门
+    ├── run_gates.py           # 新:canonical 顺序跑全门,写 GATE_REPORT.json
+    ├── extract_pdf_figures.py # 新:PDF→contact sheet→候选裁剪
+    └── preprocess_figures.py  # 新:autocrop/转格式/分辨率检查
+```
+
+工作目录输出:
+```
+poster_html/
+├── poster.html / poster.pdf / poster_preview.png
+├── POSTER_STATE.json / GATE_REPORT.json
+├── CLAIM_EVIDENCE.md / FIGURE_MANIFEST.json
+└── assets/{paper_figures,logos,qr,mathjax}/
+```
+
+## 2. 设计 token 纪律
+
+- **默认色卡 = generic(所有 venue)**:accent #2D5F8B 族 + gold #C9A24A 族 + 中性色。
+  venue 色卡 opt-in(`— venue-colors: true`),约束:accent S≤0.55、L∈[0.25,0.45];
+  gold 族固定 H∈[38,48]、S≤0.65、L∈[0.42,0.65];**主 accent 禁紫**(H 250–285),
+  除非 `— allow-purple: true`。venue identity 默认文字 badge。
+- 字号必须走 `--fs-*` token scale(≤9 档,超出 warn)。
+- serif 正文(Charter/Source Serif Pro/Georgia/Times New Roman)+
+  sans 标题(Inter/Aptos/Helvetica Neue/Arial);mono 仅代码(Menlo/Consolas)。
+
+## 3. style_check.py 源门规则(codex 定稿,逐条实现)
+
+| # | 严重度 | 规则 |
+|---|--------|------|
+| 1 | HARD | 颜色字面量只许出现在 token 文件 / `:root` token block;例外:`data-color-exempt="logo"` 的 SVG 内部 |
+| 2 | HARD | 禁 inline `style` 含颜色/字体/字号/布局关键值(豁免同上 + paper asset 内部) |
+| 3 | HARD | 组件 CSS 颜色必须 `var(--…)` |
+| 4 | HARD | 渲染后非中性色相聚类 ≤2(聚类半径 18°,须落在 accent/gold hue ±22°;非中性=alpha≥0.10 且 S≥0.18;豁免 `<img>`、logo、`data-source="paper"`、QR) |
+| 5 | HARD | 禁 `linear-gradient`;`radial-gradient` 仅许 `.poster` 背景且所有 color stop alpha≤0.06 |
+| 6 | HARD | 字体配对:正文 serif 栈、标题/表头 sans 栈 |
+| 7 | HARD | 字体白名单(§2) |
+| 8 | HARD | 字号必须用 `--fs-*` token 或组件 class,禁任意 px 漂移 |
+| 9 | WARN | 字号 token >9 档 |
+| 10 | HARD | 契约属性:论文图必须 `data-source="paper"` + `data-asset-id`;logo 豁免必须显式标注 |
+| 11 | HARD | 禁自造装饰 SVG;inline SVG 仅许 logo / QR fallback / COMPONENTS.md 已收录的结构图 |
+| 12 | WARN | 大面积深色(L<0.18 且 >8% poster 面积)→ 土嗨预警 |
+
+## 4. asset_check.py 真图门
+
+- ≥2 张 `data-source="paper"` 图;每张面积 ≥ poster 1.5%;paper-image 总面积 ≥ body 12%。
+- raster natural size ≥ rendered size 1.5×(目标 2×)。
+- FIGURE_MANIFEST.json 必填:source PDF hash、page、bbox、crop dpi、asset sha256、是否来自论文。
+- 真图获取链:论文源 figures/(SVG/PDF→SVG 转换优先)→ PDF-only 时 PyMuPDF 300–450 DPI
+  渲染 contact sheet → 自动候选 + 人工选 → 用户给 `page,x0,y0,x1,y1` bbox → 不足 2 张硬失败
+  (除非 human checkpoint 显式 waiver)。
+
+## 5. 公式门(半硬)
+
+- `EQN/BROKEN`(MathJax 没渲染出来)= HARD(vendored measure 已有)。
+- `EQN/UNDERSIZED`:.eqn inner box >80px 高且 math bbox 面积 <15% → HARD;
+  <25% 或底部空白 >35% → WARN(final 前必须修复或记录 waiver)。
+
+## 6. MathJax 本地化
+
+Phase 0 下载 tex-svg.js 到 `poster_html/assets/mathjax/`(缓存复用),HTML 引本地路径;
+下载失败 → 询问后 CDN 仅供草稿;final 的 measure 门对 MathJax 失败保持硬失败。
+
+## 7. run_gates.py + GATE_REPORT.json
+
+- canonical order:`preflight → style_check → asset_check → measure → polish`。
+- 默认 accumulate(一次给全修复面),`--fail-fast` 可选。
+- style/asset 保持独立 CLI(vendor diff 干净),run_gates.py 做编排。
+- GATE_REPORT.json schema:schema_version/skill/timestamp/poster_html/canvas{source,width_cm,
+  height_cm,orientation,source_url}/overall/hard_failures/warnings/gates[{name,severity,status,
+  command,summary,artifacts}]。
+- **polish 的 WARN 在 Phase 6 前必须清零或显式 waiver。**
+
+## 8. Workflow phases(SKILL.md 主结构)
+
+| Phase | 内容 | 门 | Checkpoint |
+|-------|------|----|------------|
+| 0 | resume + deps(Playwright 链)+ venue spec 实时调研(WebSearch/WebFetch 官方页,URL+date 入 state) | — | 🚦确认 venue/canvas |
+| 0.5 | 设计问卷(layout/palette/logo/QR/source 一轮 AskUserQuestion) | — | 🚦确认设计输入 |
+| 1 | paper ingest + content plan + claim→evidence 表 | codex fresh xhigh 内容审计 | 🚦全 claim OK 或用户接受 tradeoff |
+| 2 | 真图提取/预处理 | asset_check + FIGURE_MANIFEST | 🚦PDF-only 时人工选裁剪 |
+| 3 | scaffold + token patch | preflight + style_check | — |
+| 4 | 布局硬循环 | preflight+style+asset+measure(spread<5 aim<3;footer gap 30–50;intercard 12–50;fill 95–101%;position≤2px) | — |
+| 5 | 渲染 + Claude 视觉审(rubric §9) | ≤3 issue×≤3 轮;fix 限定词汇表 §10 | — |
+| 6 | codex 终审(fresh xhigh,审 final HTML+PDF 不是 plan;fidelity/overclaim/residue/叙事/gate logs;不直接改文件) | 任何 fix 回 Phase 4/5 | — |
+| 7 | verify-final + 报告 | PDF 1 页/尺寸/≤20MB/无 TODO/无 remote asset | 完成 |
+
+Playwright 降级链:bundled Chromium → `python -m playwright install chromium` →
+`channel="chrome"` → 仍失败则只产 content plan/scaffold,标注 "not print verified",
+不许产出最终 PDF。pdfinfo 缺 → PyMuPDF 读尺寸;pdftoppm/PyMuPDF 至少一个用于 PNG。
+
+## 9. Claude 视觉 rubric(Phase 5)
+
+1–10 分;critical cap:无真图或 <2 张 →≤3;画布坏/裁切/公式不可读 →≤4;
+≥4 个色相家族或重渐变 header →≤4;大空白卡/列 →≤5;捏造视觉 claim →≤3。
+检查项:posterly-showcase gestalt / 单 accent 纪律 / 真图居中可读 / 打印层级
+(title→headline→figures→details)/ 列底对齐无半空卡 / 公式占框 / serif+sans 配对 /
+无渐变 kitsch / 组件一体感 / 60 秒叙事。
+输出格式:`SCORE: N/10`、`CAPS_TRIGGERED`、`TOP_ISSUES(≤3)`、
+`ALLOWED_FIX_TYPE: token|component|rebalance|asset|template/canvas`、`PATCH_LOOP_RISK`。
+校准:旧 poster ≤3 分;posterly showcase ≥9 分。
+
+## 10. Fix 词汇表(反补丁循环核心)
+
+视觉审循环内只允许:
+(a) 改 `:root` token 值;
+(b) 整组件实例的换/删/加(组件集来自 COMPONENTS.md);
+(c) 内容再平衡(卡片跨列移动 / 从论文取材增删文字 / AR 门带宽内调图);
+(d) 画布/模板重选(升级路径);
+(e) 组件 stylesheet 的全局改动(只许引用 token,禁新 hex);
+(f) 预定义 variant 切换(`.figure--wide`、`.card--compact`、`.eqn--large`、`.nowrap` 等,
+   必须已录入 COMPONENTS.md);
+(g) asset fix(重裁剪/换同论文更清晰图/重跑 preprocess)。
+禁止:新 inline style、新 hex、自造装饰 SVG、单元素字号 override。
+**新组件禁止在视觉循环内诞生**——需要新组件 → 停,human checkpoint 录入 COMPONENTS.md,
+从 Phase 3 重跑。
+
+## 11. COMPONENTS.md 契约
+
+每组件:purpose / allowed variants / required data attributes / token usage /
+which gates inspect it / allowed fix operations / anti-patterns。
+首发组件:card、numbered-card、figure-card、hero-figure、eqn、result-table、
+claim-evidence、keybox、takeaways、qr-block、venue-badge、footer。
+
+## 12. 已知失败模式防御(codex round 1 §7)
+
+remote 资源 networkidle 假死→本地化;logo 豁免走私颜色→显式 data-color-exempt;
+低清裁剪→1.5×/2× 检查;截图导致 PDF 爆体积→verify-final 20MB;
+视觉审诱发新组件/新色→fix 词汇表;venue 规格过期→每次实时查+记录 URL/date;
+改写引入新 claim→Phase 6 审 final HTML 不是 content plan。
+
+## 12.5 Round-3 ACK nits(已采纳)
+
+1. style_check 规则 8:`calc(var(--fs-*) * …)` 仅许预定义组件 variant 使用,否则成漏洞。
+2. asset_check 的"paper-image 总面积 ≥ body 12%"对纯理论论文可 waiver——但首个验收案例不许 waiver。
+3. Phase 0 的 venue 调研在 skill 文案里写成泛化的 "official venue page lookup"(跨工具栈映射,codex 镜像兼容)。
+
+## 13. 验收
+
+首个验收案例:为一篇公开的 ICLR 2026 OpenReview 论文(理论+实验混合型)重做 poster:
+画布 185×90cm 横版(ICLR 官方打印服务规格),generic 色卡,
+真图来自 OpenReview PDF,目标执行方视觉 rubric ≥9 + 跨模型终审通过。
+(已达成:全 gate PASS、列底 spread <1px、两轮跨模型终审 PRINT-READY。)