# Nature Paper Xray

Read one supplied paper closely enough to reconstruct how its authors actually got...

- Repository: https://github.com/Yuan1z0825/nature-skills (51695 stars)
- Category: Design
- License: Apache-2.0
- Last updated: 2026-11-01
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add Yuan1z0825/nature-skills --skill nature-paper-xray -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add Yuan1z0825/nature-skills --skill nature-paper-xray -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add Yuan1z0825/nature-skills --skill nature-paper-xray -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add Yuan1z0825/nature-skills --skill nature-paper-xray -g -a gemini-cli -y`

## Description

Read one supplied paper closely enough to reconstruct how its authors actually got there, rather than restating what the abstract claims. Use for 精读论文, 讲透这篇论文, 把这篇读懂, 作者为什么这么设计, 这个公式怎么推出来的, paper x-ray, and deep single-paper comprehension before building on, reviewing, presenting, or citing that paper. Recovers the real starting point and the bet the authors placed, separates load-bearing design from decoration, grounds each key formula in a worked micro-example with concrete numbers, and checks how far the evidence actually reaches, including where the authors are confident and where the paper does not report something. Delivers a structured Markdown long-read by default. Not a summary, not a translation, not a peer review.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# Nature Paper X-Ray

Read a paper the way a researcher explains it at a whiteboard to a colleague: what the authors saw, why they believed it, where they hesitated, what they gave up, and which numbers would change the conclusion.

The delivered artifact is a Markdown long-read. A section-by-section summary of the paper is a failure mode, not a fallback.

## Default stance

- The method section is a teaching order, not the order the work happened in. The introduction's story is arranged after the fact. The contribution list is written for reviewers.
- The judgments that decided the paper, what the authors noticed, why they trusted it, what they abandoned, are mostly not written down. Recovering them is the job.
- Every figure was chosen. Ask what the authors want a reader to believe from this one, then look for details inside it that do not support that reading.
- A figure contains its own counter-evidence more often than the text does: a curve that crosses later, an error bar wider than the gap between compared methods, a log axis hiding a constant-factor difference, one seed standing in for a variance claim.
- Name a mechanism or say the paper does not name one. Do not supply a motive the authors never stated.

## Workflow

The rest: https://github.com/Yuan1z0825/nature-skills/blob/HEAD/skills/nature-paper-xray/SKILL.md