S05-检索策略解析

Analyzes bibliometric search queries to predict noise risks from wildcards and cross-domain homonyms.

Updated May 18, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/heyixue511-creator/ai --skill s05-heyixue511-creator
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: S05-检索策略解析
Source: https://github.com/heyixue511-creator/ai/tree/main/My-Own-Skills-main/%E6%96%87%E7%8C%AE%E8%AE%A1%E9%87%8F%E5%88%86%E6%9E%90%E6%8A%80%E8%83%BD/S05-%E6%A3%80%E7%B4%A2%E7%AD%96%E7%95%A5%E8%A7%A3%E6%9E%90
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/heyixue511-creator/ai --skill s05-heyixue511-creator

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Bibliometric datasets retrieved from databases like Web of Science often contain irrelevant records caused by wildcard expansion, cross-language homonyms, and cross-discipline term collisions. This Skill analyzes the search strategy before cleaning begins, building a noise expectation model so downstream cleaning is targeted rather than blind. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Search Query Decomposition: Breaks a full search string into concept groups, search terms, and actual matched word forms, annotating search method (exact phrase, wildcard, Boolean) and field (TS, TI, AB, DE). - Wildcard Risk Assessment: Evaluates each wildcard term across five dimensions (root expansion, cross-language homographs, cross-discipline homographs, abbreviation conflicts, naming conflicts) and assigns a three-level risk rating with expected noise proportion. - Three-Layer Noise Prediction: Forecasts word-form noise, topic noise, and boundary noise per concept group, plus cross-group overlap analysis to prioritize records for review. - Use Case: After building a concept-group mapping table for a literature review on a term like "cell", run this Skill to discover that the wildcard query also matches biological, battery, and prison-related records, then receive a tailored cleaning strategy before batch semantic judgment. ## Quick Start Analyze the noise risk structure of my current Web of Science search strategy and predict the noise types for each concept group.

Frequently Asked Questions about S05-检索策略解析

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I analyze noise risks in a Web of Science search strategy?▼

Decompose the search string into concept groups and terms, then evaluate each wildcard term for root expansion, cross-language homographs, cross-discipline meanings, abbreviation conflicts, and naming conflicts. Assign each group a high, medium, or low risk rating with an expected noise proportion.

What types of noise come from wildcard search terms in bibliometric data?▼

Three layers are predicted: word-form noise where wildcards match unrelated word forms, topic noise where the correct word has a different meaning in another discipline or language, and boundary noise where the meaning fits but the relevance is weak, such as incidental citations.

When should search strategy analysis happen in a bibliometric cleaning pipeline?▼

Run it after the research background inquiry and concept-group mapping table are complete, but before batch semantic judgment. This builds a noise expectation model so the cleaning stage targets predicted noise types instead of reviewing records blindly.

Which fields should I check first when judging record relevance?▼

The suggested priority is title, then author keywords, then abstract, then subject category, then journal name. A clear title can decide immediately; uncertain cases fall through to keywords, abstract opening sentences, and finally full abstract with subject classification.

What are the limitations of search strategy noise prediction?▼

Predictions are expectation models, not verdicts; actual noise proportions depend on the real matched records. Field weight suggestions are guidelines rather than hard rules, and individual records may require flexible judgment during the later semantic review stage.