psyclaw 0.27.23 → 0.28.1

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

@@ -0,0 +1,378 @@
+# Mode Selection Guide
+
+This guide helps users and the `intake_agent` select the most appropriate operational mode.
+
+---
+
+## Mode Selection Flowchart
+
+```
+User Input →
+│
+├── Already have complete research?
+│   ├── Yes → Want a full paper?
+│   │   ├── Yes ─────────────────────────→ full mode
+│   │   └── No → Just need an outline?
+│   │       ├── Yes ─────────────────────→ outline-only mode
+│   │       └── No → Just need an abstract?
+│   │           ├── Yes ──────────────────→ abstract-only mode
+│   │           └── No → Just need a literature review?
+│   │               ├── Yes ─────────────→ lit-review mode
+│   │               └── No ──────────────→ full mode
+│   │
+│   └── No → Want guided thinking?
+│       ├── Yes ─────────────────────────→ plan mode ★ NEW
+│       └── No ──────────────────────────→ full mode (Phase 0 will conduct an interview)
+│
+├── Have an existing paper to revise? ──────────────────────→ revision mode
+├── Have comments explicitly identified as coming from a real committee or institutional review office?
+│   └── Need tracking / response preparation ───────────────→ revision-coach committee-correspondence variant
+├── Have reviewer comments to handle?
+│   ├── Comments only, no response written yet ──────────→ revision-coach mode
+│   └── Comments + an existing rebuttal/response draft ──→ rebuttal-audit mode
+├── Need an AI-usage disclosure statement? ─────────────────→ disclosure mode
+├── Just need format conversion? ────────────────────────→ format-convert mode
+└── Just need a citation check? ────────────────────────→ citation-check mode
+```
+
+---
+
+## Detailed Description of Each Mode
+
+### full mode — Complete Paper Writing
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- User has a clear research question and (partial) materials
+- Needs to produce a complete paper from start to finish
+- Includes all phases: Interview → Literature → Structure → Argumentation → Writing → Citation → Review → Formatting
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- User has no idea about research direction (→ use `deep-research` first)
+- Only need a specific section (→ use another specialized mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Complete paper draft + references + bilingual abstract + review report
+**Expected Duration**: Long (all 8 Phases fully executed)
+**Agents Used**: All 9 + socratic_mentor (if needed)
+
+---
+
+### outline-only mode — Outline Generation
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Only need the paper structure and outline
+- A proposal to submit to an advisor for review
+- Need to quickly plan the paper structure
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- Need complete paper content (→ full mode)
+- Need guided thinking (→ plan mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Detailed outline + evidence allocation + word count distribution
+**Expected Duration**: Short (Phase 0-2)
+**Agents Used**: intake → literature_strategist → structure_architect
+
+---
+
+### plan mode — Chapter-by-Chapter Guided Planning ★ NEW
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- User has ideas but they are not yet clear enough
+- Wants guided thinking for each chapter's content
+- First-time academic paper writer
+- Wants to think through every section before writing
+- Just received materials from deep-research and needs to transform them into a paper plan
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- Already knows exactly what to write (→ full mode is faster)
+- Only needs an outline without deep thinking (→ outline-only mode)
+- Time-pressured and needs rapid output (→ full mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Chapter Plan + INSIGHT Collection
+**Expected Duration**: Medium (Step 0-3, approximately 20-30 rounds of conversation)
+**Agents Used**: intake → socratic_mentor → structure_architect → argument_builder
+
+**Subsequent Connections**:
+- Chapter Plan → full mode (produce complete paper)
+- Chapter Plan → academic-paper-reviewer (review the plan)
+
+---
+
+### revision mode — Paper Revision
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Already have a completed paper draft
+- Received reviewer comments requiring revision
+- Feel certain sections need improvement
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- No existing paper draft (→ full mode)
+- Only need to check citation format (→ citation-check mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Revised paper + revision notes (tracked changes)
+**Expected Duration**: Medium
+**Agents Used**: peer_reviewer → draft_writer → citation_compliance
+
+**Prerequisite**: User must provide existing paper content
+
+---
+
+### abstract-only mode — Abstract Writing
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Paper is already complete, only need an abstract
+- Need to submit a conference abstract
+- Need a bilingual abstract
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- No paper content to summarize (→ full mode or plan mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Bilingual abstract (zh-TW + EN) + keywords
+**Expected Duration**: Short
+**Agents Used**: intake → abstract_bilingual
+
+---
+
+### lit-review mode — Literature Review
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Need a literature review on a specific topic
+- Preparing the Literature Review chapter of a paper
+- Need a systematic search strategy and literature matrix
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- Need a complete paper (→ full mode)
+- Need an in-depth research investigation (→ deep-research)
+
+**Expected Output**: Annotated bibliography + literature matrix + synthesis analysis
+**Expected Duration**: Medium
+**Agents Used**: intake → literature_strategist
+
+---
+
+### format-convert mode — Format Conversion
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Already have paper content, need format conversion
+- Markdown → LaTeX / DOCX / PDF
+- Need to comply with a specific journal's formatting requirements
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- No existing content (→ full mode)
+- Need content modifications (→ revision mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Document in target format
+**Expected Duration**: Short
+**Agents Used**: formatter used standalone
+
+---
+
+### citation-check mode — Citation Check
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Already have a paper, only need to check citation format
+- Final check before submission
+- Switching citation format (e.g., APA → IEEE)
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- No existing citation list (→ full mode)
+- Need to modify paper content (→ revision mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Citation error report + automatic correction suggestions
+**Expected Duration**: Short
+**Agents Used**: citation_compliance used standalone
+
+---
+
+### revision-coach mode — Reviewer-Comment Triage
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Received reviewer comments / a decision letter and need them parsed into a structured plan
+- Want a Revision Roadmap that classifies, maps, and prioritizes each comment
+- Need a Response Letter Skeleton to start drafting replies
+- Deciding whether to address or push back on a comment (disagreement posture)
+- Non-journal scopes: conference rebuttal, grant-panel response, transfer-after-review
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- Already have a written rebuttal/response draft you want QA'd (→ rebuttal-audit mode)
+- The paper itself needs rewriting based on the comments (→ revision mode)
+
+**Expected Output**: Revision Roadmap + optional Tracking Template + Response Letter Skeleton
+**Expected Duration**: Short-Medium
+**Agents Used**: revision_coach_agent used standalone (no prior pipeline execution required)
+
+**Committee-correspondence variant**: when the user explicitly identifies comments
+from a real committee or institutional review office, this same entrypoint loads
+`committee_correspondence_protocol.md` and emits the separate #668 byte-accounted
+concern tracker plus placeholder response skeleton. It does not emit the reviewer
+Roadmap, Schema 11, priority/severity, a determination, or a resolution claim. Formal
+tone alone never activates the variant.
+
+---
+
+### disclosure mode — AI-Usage Disclosure Outcome
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- Paper is drafted and you need venue-specific disclosure text or a policy action checklist
+- Submitting under a covered policy target (ICLR, NeurIPS, Nature, Science, ACL, EMNLP, or a covered medical-publishing target: ICMJE, NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, BMJ, PLOS, Frontiers, publisher-wide 中华护理杂志社, journal-level 国际眼科杂志)
+- Need placement/action guidance for every required manuscript or submission channel
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- No paper drafted yet — disclosure is a finishing step (→ full mode first)
+- The venue is not in the policy database (confirm the venue's current policy manually)
+
+**Expected Output**: Default venue path — `REQUIRED` / `ACTION_ONLY` / `NOT_REQUIRED` / `UNKNOWN` applicability plus typed halt status; policy-anchor path — anchor-specific render
+**Expected Duration**: Short
+**Agents Used**: formatter agent's standalone disclosure branch, which loads the disclosure protocol before the venue policy database or policy-anchor lookup; it does not run normal Phase 7 formatting
+
+---
+
+### rebuttal-audit mode — Rebuttal-Draft QA
+
+**Applicable Scenarios**:
+- You already wrote a rebuttal/response-to-reviewers draft and want it checked before sending
+- Need a per-comment coverage table (which reviewer concerns the draft addresses, partially addresses, or misses)
+- Want risk flags for tone (too combative), unsupported claims, or a response that misreads the reviewer's point
+
+**Not Applicable When**:
+- You have reviewer comments but have **not** written a response yet (→ revision-coach mode, which *generates* a skeleton)
+- The manuscript itself needs revising (→ revision mode)
+
+**Input gate**: requires BOTH (a) the reviewer comments / decision letter AND (b) an existing rebuttal draft. Comments only → route to revision-coach. If intent is ambiguous, clarify rather than guess.
+
+**Expected Output**: Advisory QA report — per-comment coverage + gap list + risk flags. Generates no new response.
+**Expected Duration**: Short
+**Agents Used**: revision_coach_agent's comment-parsing capability, run standalone (advisory)
+
+**Integrity boundary**: a standalone invocation runs **outside** the pipeline, so rebuttal-audit does **not** emit a Schema 11 ledger, does **not** write the Material Passport, and does **not** mark anything `ready_to_submit` or verified. The output is advisory QA only.
+
+---
+
+## Paths from deep-research
+
+```
+deep-research completed
+  │
+  ├── deep-research (full mode) outputs:
+  │   RQ Brief + Methodology Blueprint + Annotated Bibliography + Synthesis Report
+  │   │
+  │   ├── Want to write the paper directly ──→ academic-paper (full mode)
+  │   │   intake_agent auto-detects materials, skips redundant questions
+  │   │
+  │   └── Want to plan before writing ──→ academic-paper (plan mode)
+  │       socratic_mentor leverages existing materials to accelerate guidance
+  │
+  └── deep-research (socratic mode) outputs:
+      INSIGHT Collection + Synthesis Report
+      │
+      ├── INSIGHTs are sufficiently clear ──→ academic-paper (full mode)
+      │
+      └── Need more guidance ──→ academic-paper (plan mode)
+          socratic_mentor continues deepening from INSIGHTs
+```
+
+## Connecting to academic-paper-reviewer
+
+```
+academic-paper completed
+  │
+  ├── full mode produces complete paper ──→ academic-paper-reviewer (full / guided)
+  │   Complete peer review + revision suggestions
+  │
+  ├── plan mode produces Chapter Plan ──→ academic-paper-reviewer (guided)
+  │   Review the plan's feasibility and completeness
+  │
+  └── reviewer feedback ──→ academic-paper (revision mode)
+      Revise paper based on review comments
+```
+
+---
+
+## Common Misselection Scenarios
+
+| User Says | Easily Misselected | Correct Choice | Reason |
+|---------|---------|---------|------|
+| "Help me write an outline" / 「幫我寫大綱」 | outline-only | First confirm: Do they want a simple outline or deep planning? | May need plan mode |
+| "I want to write a paper but don't know how to start" / 「想寫論文但不知道怎麼開始」 | full | plan mode | Needs guided thinking |
+| "Help me revise my paper" / 「幫我修改論文」 | revision | First confirm: Are there reviewer comments? | May need full mode rewrite |
+| "Help me search for literature" / 「幫我找文獻」 | lit-review | First confirm: Is it a literature review for a paper or a research investigation? | May need deep-research |
+| "I have deep-research results, help me write a paper" / 「我有研究結果，幫我寫成論文」 | full (skip Phase 0 directly) | full (but intake needs to detect handoff) | Materials need to be properly imported |
+| "I want to plan my paper step by step" / 「我想逐步規劃論文」 | outline-only | plan mode | Needs interactive guidance |
+| "The paper format is wrong" / 「論文格式不對」 | revision | citation-check or format-convert | May only need format correction |
+| 「帶我寫論文」/「引導我寫論文」 | full | plan mode | 使用者需要互動式引導，不是直接產出 |
+| 「第一次寫論文」/「論文新手」 | full | plan mode | 新手需要蘇格拉底式逐章引導 |
+
+---
+
+## Quick Decision Table
+
+| What Do You Have? | What Do You Want? | Choose This Mode |
+|-----------|-----------|------------|
+| Nothing | Complete paper | plan mode → full mode |
+| Research question + literature | Complete paper | full mode |
+| Research question + literature | Outline | outline-only mode |
+| Vague idea | Paper plan | plan mode |
+| deep-research results | Complete paper | full mode (auto-handoff) |
+| deep-research results | Guided planning | plan mode |
+| Completed paper | Revision | revision mode |
+| Completed paper | Abstract | abstract-only mode |
+| Completed paper | Format conversion | format-convert mode |
+| Completed paper | Citation check | citation-check mode |
+| Reviewer comments (no response yet) | Parse + roadmap + reply skeleton | revision-coach mode |
+| Real-committee comments (explicitly identified; no response yet) | Preserve source + concern tracker + placeholder response skeleton | revision-coach committee-correspondence variant |
+| Reviewer comments + a written rebuttal draft | QA the draft before sending | rebuttal-audit mode |
+| Drafted paper + target venue | AI-usage disclosure bundle or policy action checklist | disclosure mode |
+
+---
+
+### Plan to Full Mode Conversion Protocol
+
+When a user completes `plan` mode and wants to proceed to `full` mode for actual paper writing:
+
+#### Conversion Checklist
+
+| Plan Mode Output | Full Mode Input | Conversion Action |
+|-----------------|-----------------|-------------------|
+| Chapter Plan (structure outline) | `structure_architect` agent | Map chapters → formal sections with heading levels; validate against `paper_structure_patterns.md` |
+| Socratic Responses (Q&A transcripts) | `argument_builder` agent | Extract claims + evidence + warrants from dialogue; discard conversational scaffolding |
+| Literature Notes (if any) | `literature_strategist` agent | Independent execution — plan mode notes serve as seed keywords only; full systematic search required |
+| Argument Sketches | `argument_builder` agent | Evaluate each sketch against 4-level scoring; only `adequate` or above proceed |
+
+#### Quality Gate
+
+Before conversion, ALL of the following must be true:
+- [ ] Every chapter in the Chapter Plan has at least 1 argument sketch rated `adequate` or above
+- [ ] The overall paper structure maps to a recognized pattern in `paper_structure_patterns.md`
+- [ ] At least 5 potential references have been identified (seeds for `literature_strategist`)
+- [ ] The research question is finalized (not still evolving from Socratic dialogue)
+
+#### What Gets Discarded
+- Conversational filler from Socratic dialogue (greetings, confirmations, repetitions)
+- Tentative ideas explicitly marked as "maybe" or "not sure" by the user
+- Plan mode's iterative drafts (only the final version of each chapter plan carries over)
+
+---
+
+## Trigger-to-Mode Mapping Examples
+
+```
+"Write a paper on SDGs in HEI"           -> full
+"Give me a paper outline for..."         -> outline-only
+"Revise this paper based on feedback"    -> revision
+"Write an abstract for this paper"       -> abstract-only
+"Do a literature review on..."           -> lit-review
+"Convert this paper to LaTeX"            -> format-convert
+"Convert citations to IEEE"              -> format-convert
+"Check the citations in this paper"      -> citation-check
+"guide my paper"                         -> plan
+"help me plan my paper"                  -> plan
+"I got reviewer comments"               -> revision-coach
+"parse these reviews"                    -> revision-coach
+"help me with my revision"              -> revision-coach
+"should we push back on reviewer 2"     -> revision-coach
+"conference rebuttal" / "grant response" -> revision-coach
+"track these committee comments"          -> revision-coach committee-correspondence variant (only with explicit real-source identity)
+"audit my rebuttal draft"               -> rebuttal-audit (needs comments + an existing draft)
+"did I miss any reviewer comment"       -> rebuttal-audit
+"AI disclosure for Nature"              -> disclosure
+"generate an AI usage statement"        -> disclosure
+```

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

@@ -0,0 +1,330 @@
+# Paper Structure Patterns — 6 Paper Structure Models
+
+Used by `structure_architect_agent` and `intake_agent` to select the appropriate paper structure.
+
+## Pattern 1: IMRaD (Introduction-Method-Results-Discussion)
+
+**Best for**: Empirical research with original data collection and analysis
+**Typical length**: 5,000-8,000 words
+**Disciplines**: Sciences, Social Sciences, Education, Medicine
+
+### Structure
+
+```
+1. Title Page
+2. Abstract (150-250 words)
+   Keywords (5-7)
+3. Introduction
+   3.1 Context and Background
+   3.2 Problem Statement
+   3.3 Research Gap
+   3.4 Purpose and Research Questions
+   3.5 Significance of the Study
+4. Literature Review
+   4.1 Theoretical Framework
+   4.2 Theme 1: [related research]
+   4.3 Theme 2: [related research]
+   4.4 Theme 3: [related research]
+   4.5 Summary and Conceptual Framework
+5. Methodology
+   5.1 Research Design
+   5.2 Participants/Sample
+   5.3 Data Collection
+   5.4 Instruments/Measures
+   5.5 Data Analysis
+   5.6 Validity and Reliability
+   5.7 Ethical Considerations
+6. Results/Findings
+   6.1 Descriptive Statistics (if quantitative)
+   6.2 Finding 1 (aligned with RQ1)
+   6.3 Finding 2 (aligned with RQ2)
+   6.4 Finding 3 (if applicable)
+7. Discussion
+   7.1 Summary of Findings
+   7.2 Interpretation and Comparison with Literature
+   7.3 Theoretical Implications
+   7.4 Practical Implications
+   7.5 Limitations
+   7.6 Future Research Directions
+8. Conclusion
+9. References
+10. Appendices (if applicable)
+```
+
+### Word Allocation (6,000-word example)
+| Section | % | Words |
+|---------|---|-------|
+| Introduction | 15% | 900 |
+| Literature Review | 25% | 1,500 |
+| Methodology | 15% | 900 |
+| Results | 20% | 1,200 |
+| Discussion | 20% | 1,200 |
+| Conclusion | 5% | 300 |
+
+---
+
+## Pattern 2: Thematic Literature Review
+
+**Best for**: Synthesizing existing research, identifying gaps, proposing future directions
+**Typical length**: 6,000-10,000 words
+**Disciplines**: All (especially Social Sciences, Education, Humanities)
+
+### Structure
+
+```
+1. Title Page
+2. Abstract
+   Keywords
+3. Introduction
+   3.1 Topic and Rationale
+   3.2 Scope and Boundaries
+   3.3 Review Methodology (search strategy, inclusion criteria)
+   3.4 Organization of the Review
+4. Theme 1: [descriptive title]
+   4.1 Sub-theme A
+   4.2 Sub-theme B
+   4.3 Summary of Theme 1
+5. Theme 2: [descriptive title]
+   5.1 Sub-theme A
+   5.2 Sub-theme B
+   5.3 Summary of Theme 2
+6. Theme 3: [descriptive title]
+   6.1 Sub-theme A
+   6.2 Sub-theme B
+   6.3 Summary of Theme 3
+7. Cross-Cutting Synthesis
+   7.1 Convergent Findings
+   7.2 Divergent Findings and Debates
+   7.3 Methodological Observations
+8. Research Gaps and Future Directions
+   8.1 Identified Gaps
+   8.2 Proposed Research Agenda
+9. Conclusion
+   9.1 Key Takeaways
+   9.2 Implications for Practice/Policy
+10. References
+```
+
+### Word Allocation (8,000-word example)
+| Section | % | Words |
+|---------|---|-------|
+| Introduction | 10% | 800 |
+| Theme 1 | 20% | 1,600 |
+| Theme 2 | 20% | 1,600 |
+| Theme 3 | 20% | 1,600 |
+| Synthesis | 15% | 1,200 |
+| Gaps & Future | 10% | 800 |
+| Conclusion | 5% | 400 |
+
+---
+
+## Pattern 3: Theoretical Analysis
+
+**Best for**: Developing, critiquing, or extending theoretical frameworks
+**Typical length**: 5,000-8,000 words
+**Disciplines**: Social Sciences, Philosophy, Education
+
+### Structure
+
+```
+1. Title Page
+2. Abstract
+   Keywords
+3. Introduction
+   3.1 The Theoretical Problem
+   3.2 Why This Theory Matters
+   3.3 Purpose and Contribution
+4. Background: The Theory in Context
+   4.1 Origins and Development
+   4.2 Key Concepts and Definitions
+   4.3 Current State of the Theory
+5. Critical Analysis
+   5.1 Strengths of the Framework
+   5.2 Limitations and Gaps
+   5.3 Competing Perspectives
+   5.4 Empirical Support (or lack thereof)
+6. Proposed Extension/Revision
+   6.1 New Dimensions or Modifications
+   6.2 Conceptual Model
+   6.3 Propositions for Testing
+7. Applications and Implications
+   7.1 Theoretical Implications
+   7.2 Practical Applications
+   7.3 Methodological Implications
+8. Conclusion
+   8.1 Summary of Contribution
+   8.2 Limitations of the Analysis
+   8.3 Future Directions
+9. References
+```
+
+### Word Allocation (6,000-word example)
+| Section | % | Words |
+|---------|---|-------|
+| Introduction | 12% | 720 |
+| Background | 20% | 1,200 |
+| Critical Analysis | 28% | 1,680 |
+| Extension | 20% | 1,200 |
+| Applications | 15% | 900 |
+| Conclusion | 5% | 300 |
+
+---
+
+## Pattern 4: Case Study
+
+**Best for**: In-depth analysis of specific institutions, programs, events, or phenomena
+**Typical length**: 4,000-7,000 words
+**Disciplines**: Education, Business, Social Sciences, Medicine (clinical)
+
+### Structure
+
+```
+1. Title Page
+2. Abstract
+   Keywords
+3. Introduction
+   3.1 Background and Rationale
+   3.2 Case Selection Justification
+   3.3 Research Questions
+4. Literature Context
+   4.1 Relevant Theoretical Framework
+   4.2 Prior Research on Similar Cases
+5. Case Description
+   5.1 Context and Setting
+   5.2 Key Actors and Stakeholders
+   5.3 Timeline of Events
+   5.4 Data Sources
+6. Analysis
+   6.1 Analysis Framework
+   6.2 Theme/Finding 1
+   6.3 Theme/Finding 2
+   6.4 Theme/Finding 3
+7. Discussion
+   7.1 Cross-Theme Synthesis
+   7.2 Comparison with Literature
+   7.3 Theoretical Insights
+   7.4 Transferability (not generalizability)
+8. Lessons Learned and Recommendations
+   8.1 For Practitioners
+   8.2 For Policymakers
+   8.3 For Researchers
+9. Conclusion
+10. References
+11. Appendices (case documents, data)
+```
+
+### Word Allocation (5,000-word example)
+| Section | % | Words |
+|---------|---|-------|
+| Introduction | 12% | 600 |
+| Literature | 15% | 750 |
+| Case Description | 20% | 1,000 |
+| Analysis | 25% | 1,250 |
+| Discussion | 18% | 900 |
+| Recommendations | 7% | 350 |
+| Conclusion | 3% | 150 |
+
+---
+
+## Pattern 5: Policy Brief
+
+**Best for**: Evidence-based policy recommendations for decision-makers
+**Typical length**: 2,000-4,000 words
+**Disciplines**: Public Policy, Education, Health, Economics
+
+### Structure
+
+```
+1. Title and Author Information
+2. Executive Summary (200-300 words)
+   Key recommendations (3-5 bullet points)
+3. Background
+   3.1 The Policy Problem
+   3.2 Current Policy Context
+   3.3 Why Action is Needed Now
+4. Evidence Base
+   4.1 Key Finding 1
+   4.2 Key Finding 2
+   4.3 Key Finding 3
+   4.4 International Comparisons (if relevant)
+5. Policy Options Analysis
+   5.1 Option A: [description]
+       - Pros / Cons / Cost / Feasibility
+   5.2 Option B: [description]
+       - Pros / Cons / Cost / Feasibility
+   5.3 Option C: [description]
+       - Pros / Cons / Cost / Feasibility
+6. Recommendations
+   6.1 Recommended Option with Justification
+   6.2 Implementation Steps
+   6.3 Timeline
+   6.4 Success Metrics
+7. Conclusion
+8. References
+9. Appendix: Methodology Note
+```
+
+### Word Allocation (3,000-word example)
+| Section | % | Words |
+|---------|---|-------|
+| Executive Summary | 10% | 300 |
+| Background | 15% | 450 |
+| Evidence | 30% | 900 |
+| Options | 25% | 750 |
+| Recommendations | 15% | 450 |
+| Conclusion | 5% | 150 |
+
+---
+
+## Pattern 6: Conference Paper
+
+**Best for**: Presenting research in progress or completed studies at academic conferences
+**Typical length**: 2,000-5,000 words (varies by conference)
+**Disciplines**: All
+
+### Structure (Short Paper)
+
+```
+1. Title, Authors, Affiliations
+2. Abstract (100-200 words)
+   Keywords
+3. Introduction
+   3.1 Problem and Motivation
+   3.2 Research Question(s)
+4. Related Work
+   4.1 Key Prior Studies
+   4.2 Gap This Paper Addresses
+5. Approach / Methodology
+   5.1 Design
+   5.2 Data/Materials
+   5.3 Analysis
+6. Results (Preliminary or Complete)
+   6.1 Key Findings
+   6.2 Tables/Figures
+7. Discussion
+   7.1 Interpretation
+   7.2 Limitations
+8. Conclusion and Future Work
+9. References
+```
+
+### Word Allocation (3,000-word example)
+| Section | % | Words |
+|---------|---|-------|
+| Introduction | 15% | 450 |
+| Related Work | 20% | 600 |
+| Methodology | 20% | 600 |
+| Results | 25% | 750 |
+| Discussion | 12% | 360 |
+| Conclusion | 8% | 240 |
+
+## Pattern Selection Guide
+
+| If your paper... | Use Pattern |
+|-----------------|-------------|
+| Has original data collection | IMRaD |
+| Synthesizes existing literature | Literature Review |
+| Develops/critiques a theory | Theoretical |
+| Analyzes specific cases in depth | Case Study |
+| Recommends policy actions | Policy Brief |
+| Presents at a conference | Conference Paper |