学術論文文献レビュー生成

家

AIプロンプト一覧

学者/教師

論文文献レビュー支援

${:__('collect %s',論文文献レビュー支援)}$

学者/教師

大学教員向けに、特定のトピックに焦点を当てた文献レビューを生成するプロンプト。主要な見解と論争を統合し、高品質な学術写作を支援します。

プロンプト内容

コピー

Act as an academic writing consultant specializing in higher education. For the specific research topic I provide, such as 'Applications and Ethical Challenges of Deep Learning in Medical Imaging,' draft a rigorous literature review. First, outline key theoretical advancements from the last five years and identify major academic controversies, comparing differing school of thought views. Next, point out methodological limitations or data gaps in existing research. Finally, based on this analysis, propose innovative future research directions. Ensure the language style meets academic journal publication standards, with coherent logic and proper citation norms, avoiding colloquialisms or empty statements, and output the review text directly.

コピー

あなたは高等教育分野に特化した学術執筆コンサルタントとして行動してください。私が提供する具体的な研究テーマ、例えば「医療画像診断におけるディープラーニングの応用と倫理的課題」について、厳格な文献レビューを作成してください。まず、過去5年間の主要な理論的進展を整理し、現在の学術界における主要な論争点を特定し、異なる学派の視点を比較してください。次に、既存の研究における方法論的限界やデータの欠落を指摘してください。最後に、これらの分析に基づき、革新的な将来の研究方向を提案してください。言語スタイルは学術雑誌の掲載基準に準拠し、論理が一貫しており、引用規範が適切であることを確保し、口語的な表現や空虚な陈述を避け、レビュー本文を直接出力してください。

コピー

共有リンクをコピーするにはクリック

コメント (0)

0/300

送信

おすすめ

論文論理審査アシスタント

Act as a senior academic editor to review the provided research paragraphs, focusing on the integrity and coherence of the argumentation chain. Identify potential leaps between premises and conclusions, flag risks of insufficient evidence support or reversed causality, and provide specific revision suggestions for each identified logical flaw. Ensure the final output maintains rigorous deductive relationships under academic standards while preserving natural, fluent, and professional objectivity.

論文校正アシスタント

Act as an experienced academic journal editor and deeply polish the provided English academic paragraph. Focus on optimizing sentence fluency, vocabulary academic accuracy, and logical connection tightness while keeping the original meaning unchanged. Correct all grammatical errors and spelling issues, and convert colloquial expressions into formal academic written language. Finally, briefly explain the main modification points and their role in improving article readability, ensuring the output meets the language standards of top international journals.

論文文献レビュー支援

Act as an academic consultant specializing in higher education. Based on the specific research topic and core reference list I provide, draft a rigorous literature review. You must deeply analyze key theoretical advancements from the last five years, identify gaps and controversies in existing research, and logically synthesize various scholars' viewpoints to build a coherent argument. Ensure the language style meets academic journal standards, avoid colloquialisms, and accurately cite the provided sources to support your arguments. Finally, output a continuous, critically thinking, and academically standardized review text.

論文文法校正アシスタント

Act as an experienced academic journal editor and polish the following academic paragraph I provide. Focus on correcting grammatical errors, adjusting sentence structures to conform to formal academic writing standards, and optimizing word choices to enhance precision and professionalism while preserving the original meaning. Output only the polished text without explaining the changes.

論文校正アシスタント

Act as an experienced academic journal editor and deeply polish the provided English academic paper excerpt. Focus on optimizing the academic tone, vocabulary precision, and logical coherence, while correcting grammatical errors and punctuation usage without altering the original meaning. Ensure the language adheres to the formal style of the target journal, improving readability and eliminating ambiguity, and finally output the revised complete paragraph.

論文文献レビュー支援

Act as a senior academic researcher. For the provided research topic, synthesize key literature from the last five years, extract main academic viewpoints, methodological differences, and research gaps, construct a logical review outline, and list 5-8 representative references for further reading.