aperivue/verify-refs
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.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.