PaperSpine: Journal Writing Suite

Problem

Journal and conference writing often stalls when materials are piled up but the contribution is unclear, citations are judged by count, results are disconnected from claims, and PDF / Word or reviewer materials keep getting reworked. PaperSpine targets journal, conference, report-review, and competition scenes, requiring a confirmed contribution and motivation before producing stage-by-stage, auditable writing artifacts.

How It Works

It is driven by playbooks under references/, with routing for resume, submission, audit, translate, humanize, and respond. The default route first checks paper_rewriting_output/ for an existing checkpoint, then moves through intake, research, citation, motivation confirmation, writing, audit, and LaTeX/Word. Each stage has a gate check; if a gate fails, the workflow returns to that stage instead of hand-writing placeholder artifacts. Key rules include contribution-first organization, results subsections that validate contribution promises, and a reviewer_audit.md before submission-ready claims. Citations must use \cite{key} linked to a bibliography; Word output is standard, with Chinese-language runs producing final_paper/paper.zh.docx as the primary file.

Boundaries

It is not a prose patcher and does not generate data, metrics, p-values, datasets, figures, or experimental claims. User materials are authoritative for this paper's results, while external examples inform structure and rhetoric only. The workflow stops for user motivation confirmation and depends on the contribution, results-validation, and reviewer-audit checks passing before completion.