mirror of
https://github.com/robertjakob/rigorous.git
synced 2025-05-31 22:15:21 +03:00
Enhance context.json structure and update READMEs for new agent features and planning status
This commit is contained in:
84
Agent2_Outlet_Fit/README.md
Normal file
84
Agent2_Outlet_Fit/README.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
|
||||
## STATUS: 🚧 IN PLANNING PHASE
|
||||
This tool is currently in the planning and development phase. It aims to serve two key purposes:
|
||||
1. Help reviewers evaluate manuscripts against specific journal/conference criteria
|
||||
2. Assist journals and conferences in desk rejection decisions by providing automated preliminary screening
|
||||
3. Enable researchers to pre-check their manuscripts against target outlet requirements before submission
|
||||
|
||||
## GAMEPLAN: Agen2_outletfit
|
||||
|
||||
## 🎯 INPUTS:
|
||||
- journal_query: A string representing a journal, e.g., "I want to publish at NPJ Digital Medicine" found in context folder
|
||||
- manuscript_pdf: A PDF academic manuscript to be evaluated found in manuscripts folder
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## FUNCTIONAL LAYERS & AGENT SPECIFICATIONS:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. OUTLET RESEARCH AGENTS
|
||||
Goal: Automatically extract journal-specific publishing criteria from online sources.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agents:**
|
||||
- PolicyCrawlerAgent: Scrapes official submission guidelines, formatting, ethics, and referencing requirements.
|
||||
- ScopeAnalyzerAgent: Analyzes the journal's aims and scope to determine topical fit.
|
||||
- EditorialBehaviorAgent: Uses recent articles (titles, abstracts) to infer preferred methodologies and topics.
|
||||
- LanguageStyleAgent: Learns linguistic norms (hedging, tone, formality) from past published texts.
|
||||
- ImpactNoveltyAgent: Extracts what kinds of novelty or significance are expected.
|
||||
- ReviewerExpectationAgent: Simulates or extracts typical reviewer priorities (optional).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. CRITERIA SYNTHESIS AGENTS
|
||||
Goal: Convert raw data into structured, weighted publishing criteria.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agents:**
|
||||
- CriteriaGeneratorAgent: Translates scraped data into JSON/YAML schemas for validation.
|
||||
- CriteriaWeightingAgent: Assigns priorities or must-have/optional tags to criteria.
|
||||
- RiskHeuristicAgent: Estimates desk-rejection risk based on missing or weak components.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. MANUSCRIPT EVALUATION AGENTS
|
||||
Goal: Assess the manuscript against journal-specific requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
**Agents:**
|
||||
- PDFParserAgent: Extracts and segments text from the manuscript PDF.
|
||||
- SectionValidatorAgent: Verifies section presence, structure, and ordering.
|
||||
- ScopeFitAgent: Checks if manuscript topic aligns with journal scope (via semantic similarity).
|
||||
- LanguageConformityAgent: Assesses tone and style match with outlet norms.
|
||||
- ReferenceStyleCheckerAgent: Verifies correct citation and formatting style.
|
||||
- OverallFitSummaryAgent: Outputs a summary of compliance, risks, and improvement suggestions.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🧱 ARCHITECTURE:
|
||||
Use LangChain or CrewAI to orchestrate agents.
|
||||
|
||||
Each agent should:
|
||||
- Be modular and reusable
|
||||
- Accept clearly defined input/output types
|
||||
- Use tools such as:
|
||||
- Playwright, BeautifulSoup → web scraping
|
||||
- FAISS, OpenAI Embeddings → semantic matching
|
||||
- PyMuPDF or GROBID → PDF parsing
|
||||
- LLM API → reasoning and language evaluation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## ✅ OUTPUT:
|
||||
A JSON report that includes:
|
||||
- ✔️ Fulfilled requirements
|
||||
- ❌ Missing elements
|
||||
- 📈 Desk rejection likelihood (1-5 scale)
|
||||
- ✍️ Specific suggestions to better fit the journal
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## GOAL:
|
||||
Build a multiagent pipeline that automatically reverse-engineers a target outlet's expectations and assesses a manuscript's fit. The tool serves three key purposes:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **For Reviewers**: Streamline the review process by automatically checking manuscripts against journal/conference criteria
|
||||
2. **For Journals/Conferences**: Support desk rejection decisions by providing automated preliminary screening
|
||||
3. **For Researchers**: Enable pre-submission self-assessment to identify potential issues before formal submission
|
||||
|
||||
This comprehensive approach aims to reduce desk rejection risk, improve submission strategy, and make the peer review process more efficient for all stakeholders.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user