Audit-only verification of manuscript references against PubMed and CrossRef. Detects fabricated or mismatched citations and writes qc/reference_audit.json. Does not modify references/ or refs.bib.
npx skills add https://github.com/Aperivue/medsci-skills --skill verify-refs
You help a medical researcher prevent reference hallucinations before submission.
This skill audits an existing manuscript or bibliography. It does not write
to references/ or manuscript/_src/refs.bib. It does not discover new
literature; use /search-lit for discovery and /lit-sync for bib management.
.docx manuscripts inherited fromcoauthors or external editors.
/sync-submission freezes a journal package..md, .docx, .bib, .txt, or .tsv.--offline: extract and classify references without API verification.--timeout N: HTTP timeout seconds.For markdown manuscripts using pandoc [@bibkey] citations, validate citation
keys first to catch undefined/unused keys before this audit. If you also use the
companion manage-refs skill, run its check_citation_keys.py for this;
otherwise use your reference manager's citation-key check.
Then run verify_refs.py against the .bib to validate each entry against
PubMed/CrossRef. The two checks are complementary: a citation-key check catches
mis-keyed cites; verify_refs.py catches fabricated metadata.
Run the bundled script rather than verifying citations by memory:
python "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/verify_refs.py" manuscript/manuscript.md --project-root .
For hooks or quick manual runs, use the wrapper:
"${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/verify_cli.sh" manuscript/manuscript.md --offline
Manual pre-submission strict run (Phase 1A.5):
"${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/verify_cli.sh" manuscript/index.qmd --strict
--strict forbids --offline and exits non-zero on any UNVERIFIED row.
Full checkpoint protocol: references/manual_checkpoint_guide.md.
The script uses DOI, PMID, CrossRef, PubMed E-utilities, and OpenAlex where
available. If network verification fails, it records UNVERIFIED rather than
silently passing.
OpenAlex tertiary index (existence recovery). PubMed covers only biomedical
literature and CrossRef's conference-proceedings coverage is uneven, so
NeurIPS / ICLR / ACL-style citations — common in medical-AI manuscripts — fall
through both and would be marked UNVERIFIED. After the PubMed and CrossRef tiers,
the script consults OpenAlex (https://api.openalex.org, free, no API key) **only
when no authoritative author list was obtained yet** (so a reference already
resolved by PubMed/CrossRef incurs no extra call). It resolves by DOI when present,
otherwise by a title search guarded by a token-similarity threshold so a fabricated
title cannot earn a spurious OK. This is the free analogue of the second index
(e.g. Scopus) that journal submission portals run alongside CrossRef. OpenAlex
display names carry no structured family/given split and mix First Last with
Last, First forms, so OpenAlex-sourced authors support an existence check plus a
tolerant first-author *membership* check, but never drive the strict positional or
author-count MISMATCH (those stay reserved for PubMed efetch / CrossRef). An
OpenAlex miss is recorded as UNVERIFIED, never FABRICATED. Pass --no-openalex
to restrict verification to PubMed + CrossRef.
| Artifact | Path | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Audit JSON | qc/reference_audit.json | Sole output — row-level status (OK/MISMATCH/UNVERIFIED/FABRICATED), counts, cited_authors[]/actual_authors[], duplicate_findings[], submission-safe flag, full records |
v1.2.0 (2026-05) adds duplicate_findings[] to the audit JSON. Verbatim PMID or DOI duplicates within the reference list are flagged as MAJOR findings (resolves /peer-review Phase 2A P7). DOI normalization strips https://doi.org/, http://dx.doi.org/, doi: prefixes plus trailing slashes before comparison so https://doi.org/10.x/abc/ and 10.x/abc collapse to one key. Both submission_safe and fully_verified now require duplicate_findings to be empty.
v1.3.0 (2026-05) extends the author cross-check from first-author-only to the full author list and bumps schema_version to 4. For BibTeX inputs, every cited author family name is compared index-by-index against the authoritative source, and the cited-vs-source author counts are compared. PubMed efetch.fcgi (XML full record) is the truth source when a PMID is present — it is authoritative for given/family names where CrossRef is not (a documented case where CrossRef returned a wrong given name that PubMed efetch corrected). Records now carry cited_authors[], actual_authors[], cited_author_count, and actual_author_count. Motivation: a real AI-assisted manuscript registered a reference with a correct first author but seven of ten fabricated co-author names, and the first-author-only check passed it. Plain-text / TSV inputs, which cannot be parsed into a confident full list, degrade gracefully to the first-author check.
Removed in Phase 1A.2 (per docs/artifact_contract.md):
references/verified_references.tsv — record-level details now live inside reference_audit.json under records[].references/library.bib — never this skill's concern. /search-lit produces candidates; /lit-sync (via Better BibTeX) writes manuscript/_src/refs.bib.Sole-writer enforcement: scripts/validate_project_contract.py will flag any references/* file written by this skill as drift.
scripts/verify_refs.py.qc/reference_audit.json.FABRICATED and MISMATCH rows first (from records[]).duplicate_findings[] entries (verbatim PMID/DOI duplicates — cite renumbering required).UNVERIFIED rows remain, list them as manual checks and do not call themanuscript fully submission-safe. Rows with note = "pagination_placeholder"
(e000–e000 / in press / TBD / forthcoming) need the citation resolved
before submission; /self-review Phase 2.5c decides whether any is a P0 blocker.
records[] in chat — do not write a TSV.FABRICATED.UNVERIFIED references.author list is cross-checked against the authoritative source (PubMed efetch
preferred, then CrossRef, then PubMed esummary). A row whose DOI/PMID resolves
but whose cited authors do not match — at any index, or in total count — is
downgraded to MISMATCH. First-author mismatches get
note = "first-author hallucination suspected"; #2..#N family or count
mismatches get note = "non-first-author hallucination or count mismatch".
This catches the LLM failure mode where a real DOI is paired with invented
author names anywhere in the list, not just the lead author. Intentional CSL
et-al truncation (cited fewer than source) can be silenced per-entry with a
BibTeX _audit_truncated = <N> field.
reference list. Verbatim duplicates (same PMID or normalized DOI) — a common
LLM citation-compilation artifact — are flagged as MAJOR findings in
duplicate_findings[]. submission_safe == true requires the list to be
empty. Resolves /peer-review Phase 2A P7.
whose raw entry still carries e000–e000, in press, TBD, or forthcoming
is not yet a fully citable record. Each is marked UNVERIFIED with
note = "pagination_placeholder" (a would-be VERIFIED record is downgraded; a
worse status is left unchanged). **verify-refs is manuscript-agnostic and does not
judge centrality** — it only flags. The escalation call (is this a method- or
headline-load-bearing citation, hence a P0 submission blocker?) is made by
/self-review Phase 2.5c, which has the manuscript in hand.
Classification note — citation-metadata confusion is not fabrication. Digits
in a DOI suffix sometimes look like a journal article number but differ from the
real one (e.g., a DOI tail "77196" against article number 26068, or a "60466-1"
suffix against article 6274). This is cosmetic metadata confusion, not a
fabricated reference: do not record such rows as FABRICATED when the DOI/PMID
resolves and the authors match. A genuine FABRICATED verdict requires a
non-resolving identifier or an author cross-check failure (Gate 4), not a
mismatch between a DOI suffix and an article number.
Driven by two actual incidents. First (Gate 4 origin): a manuscript had a
reference cited with a plausible lead author but the correct DOI for an entirely
different author's whitepaper. Pre-patch verify-refs marked it OK because the
DOI resolved; post-patch it is MISMATCH. Second (v1.3.0 extension): an
AI-assembled .bib registered a reference with the correct first author but
seven of ten fabricated co-author names — the first-author-only check passed it,
and it would have shipped to reviewers. The full-author cross-check catches it.
efetch.fcgi (XML) when aPMID is present, falling back to CrossRef (DOI) and then PubMed esummary.
efetch is preferred because CrossRef is unreliable for given names.
cited_authors[],balanced-brace aware, LaTeX-accent tolerant) and compared family-by-family and
by total count against actual_authors[].
German/Nordic special letters), hyphen vs space, and name particles
("von", "van", "de", ...) are normalized before matching.
first-author surname comparison, and if even that is empty it is skipped
silently — no false MISMATCH from formatting ambiguity.
therefore excluded from this check.
+ et al., by design) would otherwise trip the count check; mark such entries
with _audit_truncated = <N> to downgrade the count mismatch to a note.
verify_refs.py answers whether a reference is real and whose it is. It cannot answer
whether the *sentence citing it* is true of it, and a citation can be perfectly real while
the claim attached to it is not. That gap is where the failure lives: the DOI resolves, the
authors match, the reference list renders, and the sentence is still wrong.
scripts/check_claim_fidelity.py checks the claims that have a checkable answer, against
full texts you have already downloaded and converted (/fulltext-retrieval produces exactly
that layout — it never fetches anything itself):
python3 "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/check_claim_fidelity.py" \
--manuscript manuscript/manuscript.md \
--fulltext-dir fulltext/ --bib manuscript/_src/refs.bib \
--out qc/claim_fidelity.json --strict
| Verdict | Severity | Fires when |
|---|---|---|
| CITED_QUOTE_ABSENT | major | Quoted text attributed to a source is not in it in any reading order. |
| CITED_QUOTE_UNRESOLVED | prompt | The quote matched only with foreign tokens wedged in, or a word or two missing — the signature of a dirty extraction, not of a fabrication. Look; do not assume. |
| ATTRIBUTION_UNSUPPORTED | prompt | Not one content word of the attributed claim appears in the source, in any form. Paraphrase normally keeps at least one of the source's own terms. |
| ORDINAL_CLAIM_UNSUPPORTED | prompt | "reports three strategies [12]" where the source discusses that noun but never that count near it. |
Only the quote verdict can fail --strict. Everything else is a prompt to go read the
source, because paraphrase is legitimate and a gate that blocks on it would be turned off.
Read the "not checked" lines. A citation with no full text on disk is reported as
unresolved and never guessed at, and a source whose extracted text is an abstract is reported
as too short to judge — absence proves nothing against an abstract. Silence from this
detector means "nothing checkable was wrong", which is not the same as "everything is right".
/fulltext-retrieval); claim fidelity reads converted textoff disk so it stays deterministic and CI-runnable.
quoted, attributed, or counted claim is supported by the source's own words.
/search-lit or user approval.
/lit-sync after this audit.volumes, or pages.
UNVERIFIED and keep it visible.Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section. Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership.
Identifies high-quality leads for your product or service by analyzing your business, searching for target companies, and providing actionable contact strategies. Perfect for sales, business development, and marketing professionals.
Use this skill to query your Google NotebookLM notebooks directly from Claude Code for source-grounded, citation-backed answers from Gemini. Browser automation, library management, persistent auth. Drastically reduced hallucinations through document-only responses.
Efficient database search tool for bioRxiv preprint server. Use this skill when searching for life sciences preprints by keywords, authors, date ranges, or categories, retrieving paper metadata, downloading PDFs, or conducting literature reviews.
Query and analyze scholarly literature using the OpenAlex database. This skill should be used when searching for academic papers, analyzing research trends, finding works by authors or institutions, tracking citations, discovering open access publications, or conducting bibliometric analysis across 240M+ scholarly works. Use for literature searches, research output analysis, citation analysis, and academic database queries.
Access USPTO APIs for patent/trademark searches, examination history (PEDS), assignments, citations, office actions, TSDR, for IP analysis and prior art searches.
Multiagent AI system for scientific research assistance that automates research workflows from data analysis to publication. This skill should be used when generating research ideas from datasets, developing research methodologies, executing computational experiments, performing literature searches, or generating publication-ready papers in LaTeX format. Supports end-to-end research pipelines with customizable agent orchestration.
Automated LLM-driven hypothesis generation and testing on tabular datasets. Use when you want to systematically explore hypotheses about patterns in empirical data (e.g., deception detection, content analysis). Combines literature insights with data-driven hypothesis testing. For manual hypothesis formulation use hypothesis-generation; for creative ideation use scientific-brainstorming.
Take aperivue/verify-refs from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.