Marketplace

research-gap-visualizer

Identify and visualize research gaps, coverage, and conflicts with explicit constraints and evidence.

allowed_tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, Task, TodoWrite
model: sonnet

$ 安裝

git clone https://github.com/DNYoussef/context-cascade /tmp/context-cascade && cp -r /tmp/context-cascade/skills/research/research-gap-visualizer ~/.claude/skills/context-cascade

// tip: Run this command in your terminal to install the skill


name: research-gap-visualizer description: Identify and visualize research gaps, coverage, and conflicts with explicit constraints and evidence. allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, Task, TodoWrite model: sonnet x-version: 3.2.0 x-category: research x-vcl-compliance: v3.1.1 x-cognitive-frames:

  • HON
  • MOR
  • COM
  • CLS
  • EVD
  • ASP
  • SPC

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

Purpose

  • Map what is known vs. unknown for a research topic and highlight actionable gaps.
  • Use constraint hygiene and explicit confidence ceilings to avoid overclaiming coverage.
  • Preserve structure-first artifacts (SKILL, README, references, examples).

Trigger Conditions

  • Positive: planning literature reviews, prioritizing experiments, or aligning stakeholders on open questions.
  • Negative: pure synthesis without visualization (use literature-synthesis) or execution planning (interactive-planner).

Guardrails

  • Constraints captured in HARD / SOFT / INFERRED buckets (scope, domains, timelines, exclusion criteria).
  • Two-pass refinement: initial gap map → epistemic validation with evidence strength and conflicts.
  • Each gap lists required evidence and confidence ceiling for current assessment.

Inputs

  • Research question or topic; inclusion/exclusion criteria.
  • Existing sources and their quality.
  • Desired visualization format (table, bullet map, graph description).

Workflow

  1. Scope & Constraints: Define boundaries and bucket constraints; confirm INFERRED assumptions.
  2. Evidence Inventory: Catalog sources, claims, and confidence ceilings; mark conflicts.
  3. Gap Mapping: Identify unaddressed questions, weak evidence areas, and dependencies.
  4. Validation Pass: Check coverage vs. constraints; ensure gaps have clear evidence needs and owners.
  5. Deliver & Store: Produce gap map plus recommendations; update references/examples.

Validation & Quality Gates

  • Gaps trace back to constraints and evidence inventory.
  • Conflicts and weaknesses called out with ceilings.
  • Recommended next steps/owners attached to each gap.

Response Template

**Scope & Constraints**
- HARD / SOFT / INFERRED.

**Coverage Snapshot**
- What is known (source → confidence).
- Conflicts.

**Gaps**
- Gap → evidence needed → owner/next step → confidence ceiling.

Confidence: 0.78 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - based on current evidence inventory.

Confidence: 0.78 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - reflects validated gap mapping against available evidence.