NSFC Abstract Master

Problem

NSFC abstracts often drift into long background, missing hypotheses, or research content that reads like a method plan, so the core contribution loses focus. NSFC-abstract-master turns this writing problem into a concrete compression task: from an existing title, hypothesis, research content, and preliminary basis, it converges the application material into a five-sentence abstract of about 400±10 characters.

How it works

It organizes the abstract around a fixed structure:

• Sentence 1: background, about 50 characters, states the field and current state while removing low-information phrases;
• Sentence 2: problem, about 50 characters, names the unresolved mechanism, hub, or theoretical gap;
• Sentence 3: hypothesis, about 80 characters, uses prior work to support the core hypothesis;
• Sentence 4: content, about 150 characters, keeps 2–3 research items focused on scientific variables and mechanisms rather than tools or methods;
• Sentence 5: significance, about 70 characters, separates theoretical contribution from practical support.

It emphasizes content/method separation: research content should not become a technical route, and the three items should ideally show a progression from upstream trigger to core mechanism to downstream phenotype. It then checks length, structure, filler language, hypothesis clarity, significance specificity, and logical layering.

Limits

This skill fits compression after the scientific question, hypothesis, research content, and preliminary basis have already been established. It is not intended to generate research ideas from scratch or replace real experimental evidence. The more concrete the input material, the more reliable the output; with only a title or vague direction, it can still provide a structural draft but cannot guarantee scientifically grounded claims.