psyclaw 0.27.22 → 0.28.0

package/vendor/ars/academic-paper/references/failure_paths.md

@@ -0,0 +1,349 @@
+# Failure Paths — Academic Paper Writing Failure Path Map
+
+This document records the failure scenarios that the academic-paper skill may encounter at each stage, their trigger conditions, and handling strategies. All agents should refer to this guide when they detect a failure scenario.
+
+---
+
+## Failure Path Overview
+
+| # | Failure Scenario | Trigger Condition | Severity | Handling Strategy |
+|---|---------|---------|--------|---------|
+| F1 | Insufficient research foundation | Plan mode Step 0 finds no RQ / no data | High | Recommend running `deep-research` first |
+| F2 | Wrong paper structure selected | structure_architect finds RQ-structure mismatch | Medium | Return to Phase 2, suggest alternative structures |
+| F3 | Severely over word count | Draft exceeds target word count by 30% or more | Medium | Identify sections to cut, suggest condensing |
+| F4 | Severely under word count | Draft is 30% or more below target word count | Medium | Identify sections to expand, suggest additions |
+| F5 | Citation format entirely wrong | citation_compliance finds > 50% format errors | High | Completely re-run citation phase |
+| F6 | Poor bilingual abstract quality | Chinese and English abstracts have inconsistent logic | Medium | Re-run abstract_bilingual |
+| F7 | Peer review rejection | peer_reviewer issues a Reject verdict | High | Analyze rejection reasons, recommend major revision or restructuring |
+| F8 | Plan mode does not converge | > 15 rounds of dialogue without completing all chapters | Medium | Suggest switching to outline-only mode |
+| F9 | Incomplete handoff materials | From deep-research but missing key materials | Low | List missing items, suggest supplementing or re-running |
+| F10 | User abandons midway | Explicitly states unwillingness to continue | Low | Save completed Chapter Plan |
+| F11 | Desk-reject | Journal editor rejects without sending to reviewers | High | Classify rejection cause, select recovery strategy |
+| F12 | Conference-to-journal conversion failure | Conference paper expansion to journal article rejected | Medium | Ensure 30-50% new content + proper citation |
+
+---
+
+## Detailed Handling Strategies
+
+### F1: Insufficient Research Foundation
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Plan mode Step 0 (Research Readiness Check) or Full mode Phase 0
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- User cannot describe their research question in one sentence
+- No literature foundation
+- No concept of research methods
+- Topic is too broad and cannot be focused
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. Affirm the user's research interest
+2. Specifically explain what is currently missing
+3. Recommend using deep-research (socratic mode)
+4. Explain that they can come back to continue after deep-research is completed
+5. If the user insists on continuing, switch to outline-only mode (low risk)
+```
+
+**Response Template**:
+```
+Your research topic is very interesting, but I notice that a clear research question
+and literature foundation are still missing.
+
+I recommend you first use the deep-research tool to:
+1. Systematically search and organize relevant literature
+2. Focus on a researchable question
+3. Gain a preliminary understanding of possible research methods
+
+Once completed, bring the materials back and we can produce a high-quality paper
+more efficiently.
+```
+
+---
+
+### F2: Wrong Paper Structure Selected
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Phase 2 (structure_architect_agent)
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- RQ is a causal question but a Literature Review structure was selected
+- No data but IMRaD was selected
+- Topic suits a Case Study but Policy Brief was selected
+- Word count target and structure are mismatched (e.g., 3000-word IMRaD)
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. Point out the mismatch between RQ and structure
+2. Explain why they are mismatched
+3. Suggest 1-2 alternative structures
+4. Explain how the alternative structures better answer the RQ
+5. Return to Phase 2 to let the user re-select
+```
+
+---
+
+### F3: Severely Over Word Count
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Phase 4 (after draft_writer_agent completes)
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- Actual word count > target word count x 1.3
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. List actual word count vs. target word count for each chapter
+2. Identify the most over-count chapters
+3. Suggest reduction strategies:
+   a. Merge duplicate arguments
+   b. Condense the literature review (keep core literature)
+   c. Remove overly detailed method descriptions
+   d. Compress repeated literature dialogue in Discussion
+4. Do not proactively delete; let the user decide
+```
+
+---
+
+### F4: Severely Under Word Count
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Phase 4 (after draft_writer_agent completes)
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- Actual word count < target word count x 0.7
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. List actual word count vs. target word count for each chapter
+2. Identify the most deficient chapters
+3. Suggest expansion strategies:
+   a. Increase the depth and breadth of the literature review
+   b. Add more evidence and examples
+   c. Expand Discussion (more literature dialogue)
+   d. Add more detail to methodology descriptions
+4. Provide specific expansion directions
+```
+
+---
+
+### F5: Citation Format Entirely Wrong
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Phase 5a (citation_compliance_agent)
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- Citation format error rate > 50%
+- Systematic errors (e.g., all missing DOIs, all using wrong format)
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. Analyze error patterns (systematic vs. scattered)
+2. If systematic errors:
+   a. Identify root cause (user may have selected the wrong citation format)
+   b. Confirm the correct citation format
+   c. Completely re-run citation phase
+3. If scattered errors:
+   a. Fix one by one
+   b. Produce a correction report
+```
+
+---
+
+### F6: Poor Bilingual Abstract Quality
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Phase 5b (abstract_bilingual_agent)
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- Chinese and English abstracts cover different key points
+- One language version omits important findings
+- Keywords do not correspond between Chinese and English
+- Word count seriously deviates from standards
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. Compare the structure and coverage of Chinese and English abstracts
+2. List inconsistencies
+3. Rewrite based on the actual paper content as the standard
+4. Ensure both versions are independently written but cover the same key points
+```
+
+---
+
+### F7: Peer Review Rejection
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Phase 6 (peer_reviewer_agent issues Reject)
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- Criterion-bound trigger: at least one named, decision-critical criterion is
+  `DOES_NOT_MEET`, with the manuscript evidence and applicable standard stated
+- A decision-critical criterion is `NOT_ASSESSED` because required evidence is
+  absent, so an acceptance or revision finding is not supportable
+- Fatal flaws exist (logical breakdowns, missing core evidence, serious methodology flaws)
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. List all issues flagged as Critical
+2. Classify the nature of the problems:
+   a. Fixable (writing, formatting, minor logic issues) → Recommend Major Revision
+   b. Structural issues (argument architecture needs reorganization) → Return to Phase 3 for restructuring
+   c. Fundamental issues (RQ infeasible, insufficient data) → Return to Phase 0 for re-evaluation
+3. Produce a revision roadmap
+4. Execute revision after user confirmation
+```
+
+**Note**: If still Reject after 2 rounds of revision, recommend the user to:
+- Consult domain experts
+- Rethink the research design
+- Consider switching target journals (lower the bar)
+
+---
+
+### F8: Plan Mode Does Not Converge
+
+**Trigger Timing**: Plan mode dialogue exceeds 15 rounds
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- User repeatedly modifies the direction of the same chapter
+- Unable to make definitive decisions
+- Discussion drifts off the paper topic
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. Pause and summarize what has been determined so far
+2. List completed and uncompleted chapters
+3. Provide two options:
+   a. Jump to outline-only mode (directly produce an outline)
+   b. Continue dialogue (but narrow the scope of each discussion)
+4. Save the completed Chapter Plan
+```
+
+---
+
+### F9: Incomplete Handoff Materials
+
+**Trigger Timing**: intake_agent detects deep-research materials but they are incomplete
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- Has RQ but missing Annotated Bibliography
+- Has Bibliography but missing Synthesis Report
+- Has INSIGHT Collection but some INSIGHTs are incomplete
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. List received and missing materials
+2. Assess the impact of missing materials:
+   a. Missing Bibliography → Need Phase 1 (literature_strategist)
+   b. Missing Synthesis → Can continue, Phase 3 handles it additionally
+   c. Missing Methodology Blueprint → Need Phase 0 supplementary questions
+3. Recommend:
+   a. Return to deep-research to complete the missing parts
+   b. Or supplement within academic-paper (add Phase 0 interview questions)
+```
+
+---
+
+### F10: User Abandons Midway
+
+**Trigger Timing**: User explicitly states unwillingness to continue
+
+**Detection Indicators**:
+- "Forget it" / "Not writing anymore" / "Too complicated" / "Let me think about it"
+- Abandons after prolonged unresponsiveness
+
+**Handling Process**:
+```
+1. Respect the user's decision
+2. Save all completed outputs:
+   - Paper Configuration Record
+   - Chapter Plan (completed portions)
+   - INSIGHT Collection
+   - Any completed draft sections
+3. Inform the user they can come back anytime with these materials to continue
+4. Do not actively persuade them to continue (but encouragement is fine)
+```
+
+**Save Format**:
+```markdown
+## Academic Paper — Saved Record
+
+**Topic**: {topic}
+**Progress**: Phase {N} / Step {M}
+**Completed**:
+- [x] Paper Configuration Record
+- [x/partial] Chapter Plan (completed {N}/{total} chapters)
+- [ ] Draft
+- [ ] Citation check
+- [ ] Peer review
+
+**How to Resume**: Bring this record and restart academic-paper; can continue from Phase {N}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Relationships Between Failure Paths
+
+```
+F1 (Insufficient research foundation) → Recommend deep-research → May encounter F9 (incomplete materials) upon return
+F2 (Wrong structure) → Return to Phase 2 → May cascading affect F3/F4 (word count issues)
+F5 (All citations wrong) → May be a downstream effect of F2 (wrong format selected)
+F7 (Rejection) → Analysis may require returning to F2 (structure) or F1 (foundation)
+F8 (Non-convergence) → May evolve into F10 (abandonment)
+```
+
+### F11: Desk-Reject Recovery
+
+**Trigger**: Editor rejects the paper without sending to reviewers.
+
+**Cause Classification & Recovery**:
+
+| Cause | Diagnostic Signs | Recovery Strategy |
+|-------|-----------------|-------------------|
+| **Scope Mismatch** | Editor states "outside journal scope" or "not aligned with journal aims" | Re-analyze journal scope using `top_journals_by_field.md`; identify 3 alternative journals; may need to reframe the paper's contribution |
+| **Insufficient Novelty** | "Incremental contribution" or "well-established findings" | Sharpen the contribution positioning WITHIN the documented search bounds (#548): enumerate the nearest prior work and state the delta precisely; consider additional analysis or a new dataset; never respond by absolutizing novelty language ("first study to...") beyond what the documented search supports |
+| **Formatting Non-Compliance** | Immediate rejection for template/length/style violations | Review target journal's author guidelines; use `formatter_agent` to reformat; resubmit (often same journal accepts after formatting fix) |
+| **Poor Opening** | No specific reason given; likely the abstract/introduction failed to hook | Rewrite abstract with the CARS model (Create A Research Space); lead with the gap, not the background; have `peer_reviewer_agent` evaluate the new opening |
+
+**General Protocol**:
+1. Do NOT take desk-reject personally — 30-50% of submissions to top journals are desk-rejected
+2. Read the editor's email carefully for any specific feedback
+3. Determine the cause category above
+4. If Scope Mismatch: pivot journal, not paper
+5. If Novelty/Opening: revise paper, then resubmit (different journal recommended)
+6. Turnaround target: 2 weeks for reformatting, 4 weeks for substantive revision
+
+---
+
+### F12: Conference-to-Journal Conversion Failure
+
+**Trigger**: Attempt to expand a published conference paper into a journal article fails review.
+
+**Common Rejection Reasons & Solutions**:
+
+| Reason | Solution |
+|--------|----------|
+| **Insufficient Extension** (< 30% new content) | Journal expects 30-50% new material beyond the conference version. Add: extended related work, additional experiments/data, deeper analysis, new discussion sections |
+| **Self-Plagiarism Flag** | Explicitly cite the conference version in the introduction: "This paper extends our previous work [conf-citation] with..." Use iThenticate to verify < 30% text overlap |
+| **Stale Results** | If the conference paper is > 2 years old, results may be outdated. Update experiments with current data/baselines; acknowledge temporal limitations |
+| **Missing Journal Standards** | Conference papers often lack: detailed methodology, reproducibility information, limitations section, broader impact discussion. Add all of these |
+
+**Conversion Checklist**:
+- [ ] Conference version explicitly cited in introduction
+- [ ] 30-50% genuinely new content added (not just padding)
+- [ ] Text overlap with conference version < 30% (verified by similarity tool)
+- [ ] All reviewer expectations for a journal-length paper met
+- [ ] Notation in cover letter: "This is an extended version of [conference paper]"
+- [ ] Check journal policy: some journals prohibit conference-to-journal conversion
+
+---
+
+## Preventive Measures
+
+| Failure Path | Preventive Measure |
+|---------|---------|
+| F1 | Phase 0 / Step 0 strictly checks research readiness |
+| F2 | structure_architect cross-validates the match between RQ and structure |
+| F3/F4 | draft_writer checks word count progress after completing each section |
+| F5 | draft_writer uses the correct format during writing |
+| F6 | abstract_bilingual writes independently based on the paper content as the standard |
+| F7 | argument_builder stress-tests arguments in Phase 3 |
+| F8 | socratic_mentor sets a dialogue cap per chapter |
+| F9 | intake_agent performs a complete materials check when detecting a handoff |
+| F10 | Maintain dialogue rhythm to avoid user fatigue |
+| F11 | Phase 7 researches target journal scope when producing the cover letter; format_agent strictly follows formatting rules |
+| F12 | intake_agent detects whether this is a conference paper expansion; calculate new content ratio early |

package/vendor/ars/academic-paper/references/funding_statement_guide.md

@@ -0,0 +1,319 @@
+# Funding Statement Guide
+
+Used by `intake_agent`, `formatter_agent`, and `draft_writer_agent`.
+
+## Overview
+
+A funding statement is a mandatory declaration in academic papers. Whether or not the research received funding, it must be clearly stated. Most journals require funding information at submission and include a formal statement in the manuscript. This guide covers format standards for major funding agencies in Taiwan and internationally, statement templates, and the distinction from COI statements.
+
+---
+
+## Taiwan Funding Agency Formats
+
+### 1. NSTC (National Science and Technology Council)
+
+**Predecessor**: MOST (Ministry of Science and Technology), reorganized into NSTC in July 2022.
+
+**Grant Number Format**: `NSTC [Year]-[Discipline Code]-[Category]-[Serial Number]-[Sub-project]`
+
+| Field | Description | Example |
+|------|------|------|
+| Year | ROC year, 3 digits | 113 |
+| Discipline Code | Discipline classification code | 2410 (Education) |
+| Category | Grant type | H (Research Project) |
+| Serial Number | Application sequence number | 001 |
+| Sub-project | Sub-project (if applicable) | MY2 (Multi-year, Year 2) |
+
+**Common Discipline Codes** (Higher Education research related):
+
+| Code | Discipline |
+|------|------|
+| 2410 | Education |
+| 2420 | Psychology |
+| 2422 | Management |
+| 2418 | Sociology |
+
+**English Format Example**:
+```
+This work was supported by the National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan
+(Grant No. NSTC 113-2410-H-003-001).
+```
+
+**Chinese Format Example**:
+```
+This research was supported by a research project grant from the National Science and
+Technology Council (Grant No.: NSTC 113-2410-H-003-001). We hereby express our gratitude.
+```
+
+**Notes**:
+- Grants before July 2022 use MOST numbers (e.g., MOST 110-2410-H-003-001); retain the original number when citing
+- Multi-year grants should indicate the year (e.g., MY2 for Year 2)
+- When a single paper involves multiple grants, list them in order of significance
+
+### 2. MOE (Ministry of Education)
+
+**Common Grant Types**:
+
+| Grant | English Name | Number Format |
+|------|---------|---------|
+| Higher Education Sprout Project | Higher Education Sprout Project | MOE-[Year]-S-[Institution Code] |
+| Teaching Practice Research Program | Teaching Practice Research Program | PBM[Year][Serial] |
+| University Social Responsibility Project (USR) | University Social Responsibility Project | MOE-USR-[Year]-[Serial] |
+| Yushan Scholar Program | Yushan Scholar Program | -- |
+| Study Abroad Programs | Study Abroad Programs | -- |
+
+**English Format Example**:
+```
+This work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Taiwan, through the
+Higher Education Sprout Project (Grant No. MOE-113-S-0023).
+```
+
+**Chinese Format Example**:
+```
+This research was supported by the Ministry of Education Higher Education Sprout Project
+(Grant No.: MOE-113-S-0023). We hereby express our gratitude.
+```
+
+### 3. Institutional Grants
+
+**Common Types**:
+
+| Grant Type | Description |
+|---------|------|
+| Institutional Research Development Fund | Internal grants managed by the Office of Research and Development |
+| Teaching Research Grant | Grants from the Office of Academic Affairs or Center for Teaching Development |
+| New Faculty Research Grant | Startup funding for newly hired faculty |
+| Interdisciplinary Research Grant | Encouraging cross-college/department collaboration |
+
+**English Format Example**:
+```
+This work was supported by a research grant from [University Name]
+(Grant No. [Institutional Number]).
+```
+
+**Chinese Format Example**:
+```
+This research was supported by an internal research grant from [University Name]
+(Grant No.: [Institutional Number]). We hereby express our gratitude.
+```
+
+---
+
+## International Funding Agency Formats
+
+### Major International Funding Agencies
+
+| Agency | Full Name | Country | Format Example |
+|------|------|------|---------|
+| **NSF** | National Science Foundation | USA | NSF Award No. 2345678 |
+| **NIH** | National Institutes of Health | USA | NIH Grant R01-GM123456 |
+| **ERC** | European Research Council | EU | ERC Grant Agreement No. 123456 |
+| **JSPS** | Japan Society for the Promotion of Science | Japan | JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. JP12345678 |
+| **ARC** | Australian Research Council | Australia | ARC Discovery Project DP230101234 |
+| **ESRC** | Economic and Social Research Council | UK | ESRC Grant ES/V012345/1 |
+| **DFG** | Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft | Germany | DFG Project No. 123456789 |
+| **SSHRC** | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council | Canada | SSHRC Grant 123-2024-1234 |
+
+### International Format Examples
+
+**NSF**:
+```
+This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation
+under Grant No. 2345678. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or
+recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and
+do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
+```
+
+**ERC**:
+```
+This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC)
+under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme
+(Grant Agreement No. 123456).
+```
+
+**JSPS**:
+```
+This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP12345678.
+```
+
+**Note**: Some funding agencies (especially NSF) have specific disclaimer requirements that must be quoted verbatim.
+
+---
+
+## Statement Templates
+
+### Funded (Single Source)
+
+**English**:
+```
+Funding: This work was supported by the [Funder Full Name] [Grant Type]
+(Grant No. [Number]).
+```
+
+**Chinese**:
+```
+Funding: This research was supported by the [Funder Full Name] [Grant Type]
+(Grant No.: [Number]). We hereby express our gratitude.
+```
+
+### Funded (Multiple Sources)
+
+**English**:
+```
+Funding: This work was supported by the [Funder 1] (Grant No. [Number 1]);
+the [Funder 2] (Grant No. [Number 2]); and the [Funder 3] (Grant No. [Number 3]).
+```
+
+**Chinese**:
+```
+Funding: This research was supported by the following grants:
+(1) [Funder 1] (Grant No.: [Number 1]);
+(2) [Funder 2] (Grant No.: [Number 2]);
+(3) [Funder 3] (Grant No.: [Number 3]).
+We hereby express our gratitude.
+```
+
+### No Funding
+
+**English**:
+```
+Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in
+the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
+```
+
+**Chinese**:
+```
+Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from public,
+commercial, or not-for-profit funding agencies.
+```
+
+### Partial Funding
+
+**English**:
+```
+Funding: This work was partially supported by the [Funder] (Grant No. [Number]).
+The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision
+to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
+```
+
+**Chinese**:
+```
+Funding: This research was partially supported by [Funder] (Grant No.: [Number]).
+The funder had no involvement in the design, data collection and analysis,
+publication decision, or manuscript preparation of this research.
+```
+
+---
+
+## Distinction from COI Statement
+
+Funding statement and Conflict of Interest (COI) statement are **two separate declarations** that must not be conflated:
+
+| Comparison Item | Funding Statement | COI Statement |
+|---------|------------------|---------------|
+| **Purpose** | Disclose research funding sources | Disclose interests that could affect research objectivity |
+| **Content** | Funder name, grant number, funder role | Financial interests, consulting relationships, equity, patents, etc. |
+| **When None Exist** | Still must declare "no funding" | Still must declare "no conflicts of interest" |
+| **Journal Location** | Usually before or after acknowledgments | Usually before or after acknowledgments |
+| **Disclosure Scope** | Only covers direct funding for this research | Covers all relationships that could affect objectivity |
+
+### COI Statement Templates
+
+**No Conflict of Interest** (English):
+```
+Declaration of Interest: The authors declare that they have no known competing
+financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
+influence the work reported in this paper.
+```
+
+**No Conflict of Interest** (Chinese):
+```
+Declaration of Interest: All authors declare that, with respect to the research
+reported in this paper, there are no known competing financial interests or
+personal relationships.
+```
+
+**Conflict of Interest Exists** (English):
+```
+Declaration of Interest: [Author Name] has received research grants from
+[Organization] and serves as a consultant for [Company]. The remaining
+authors declare no competing interests.
+```
+
+---
+
+## Common Journal Format Requirements
+
+### By Publisher
+
+| Publisher | Location | Format Requirements |
+|--------|------|---------|
+| **Elsevier** | Separate "Funding" section | Funder name + grant number; use the submission system's funding form |
+| **Springer Nature** | Under "Declarations" section | Contains sub-sections for Funding + COI + Ethics, etc. |
+| **Wiley** | "Acknowledgments" or separate section | Varies by journal |
+| **Taylor & Francis** | "Funding" or "Disclosure statement" | Funder name + grant number |
+| **PLOS** | Submission system + manuscript | Enter individually in submission system; must also include in manuscript |
+| **MDPI** | Separate "Funding" section | Located after "Author Contributions" |
+
+### By Major Higher Education Journals
+
+| Journal | Format |
+|------|------|
+| *Higher Education* | Springer "Declarations" format |
+| *Studies in Higher Education* | Taylor & Francis "Disclosure statement" |
+| *Research in Higher Education* | Springer "Declarations" format |
+| *Quality in Higher Education* | Taylor & Francis "Disclosure statement" |
+| Journal of Research in Education Sciences (Jiao Yu Ke Xue Yan Jiu Qi Kan) | Chinese format, stated in the acknowledgments section |
+| Higher Education Review (Gao Deng Jiao Yu) | Chinese format, stated in the acknowledgments section |
+
+---
+
+## Taiwan-Specific Requirements
+
+### NSTC Grant Outcome Reporting Requirements
+
+1. **Journal article acknowledgment**: When publishing research outcomes funded by NSTC, the grant number **must** be acknowledged in the paper
+2. **Number format evolution**:
+   - Before July 2022: `MOST [Year]-[Discipline]-[Category]-[Serial]`
+   - After July 2022: `NSTC [Year]-[Discipline]-[Category]-[Serial]`
+   - Use the agency name at the time the grant was approved when citing
+3. **Both Chinese and English declarations required**: If the paper is in English, use English for the funding statement; if in Chinese, use Chinese
+4. **Open Access fees**: If APC is paid from grant funds, some journals require additional explanation
+
+### MOE Grant Requirements
+
+1. Higher Education Sprout Project outcomes must indicate "Ministry of Education Higher Education Sprout Project"
+2. Teaching Practice Research Program outcomes must indicate the grant number
+3. Some grants require specific labeling formats (per annual announcements)
+
+### Institutional Grants
+
+Regulations vary by institution. Recommendations:
+1. Check the Office of Research and Development for acknowledgment format standards
+2. Use the full institutional name (including the full English name)
+3. Include the institutional grant number
+
+---
+
+## Best Practices
+
+### Funding Statement Writing Checklist
+
+- [ ] All funding sources have been listed (including institutional grants)
+- [ ] Grant numbers are correct and complete
+- [ ] Funding agencies use their official full names (not abbreviations on first mention)
+- [ ] If no funding, explicitly declare "no funding"
+- [ ] If the funding agency requires a specific disclaimer, it has been quoted verbatim
+- [ ] Funding statement and COI statement are stated separately
+- [ ] English papers use English statements; Chinese papers use Chinese statements
+- [ ] Multiple funding sources have been ordered by significance or alphabetically
+- [ ] Funder names reflect the official name at the time the grant was approved
+
+---
+
+## Reference Resources
+
+- NSTC Research Project Guidelines: https://www.nstc.gov.tw/
+- Elsevier funding body agreements: https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access/agreements
+- CHORUS (Clearinghouse for the Open Research of the United States): https://www.chorusaccess.org/
+- Crossref Funder Registry: https://www.crossref.org/services/funder-registry/