paper-illustration-image2
Paper Illustration Image2
Generate publication-quality paper figures using Claude as the planner/reviewer and a local Codex app-server MCP bridge as the raster renderer.
Core Design Philosophy
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ MULTI-STAGE ITERATIVE WORKFLOW │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ User Request │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ Claude │ ◄─── Step 1: Parse request, create initial prompt │
│ │ (Planner) │ - Extract components, labels, and data flow │
│ │ │ - Write a paper-ready figure brief │
│ └──────┬──────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │Claude/Codex │ ◄─── Step 2: Optimize layout description │
│ │ Layout │ - Refine component positioning │
│ │ Review │ - Optimize spacing and grouping │
│ └──────┬──────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │Claude/Codex │ ◄─── Step 3: CVPR/NeurIPS style verification │
│ │ Style │ - Check palette, arrows, and label standards │
│ │ Check │ - Tighten the prompt before rendering │
│ └──────┬──────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ codex-image2│ ◄─── Step 4: Native image generation via bridge │
│ │ MCP bridge │ - Call generate_start / generate_status │
│ │ + app-server│ - Accept only native imageGeneration output │
│ └──────┬──────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ ┌─────────────┐ │
│ │ Claude │ ◄─── Step 5: STRICT visual review + SCORE (1-10) │
│ │ (Reviewer) │ - Verify logic, labels, arrows, and aesthetics │
│ │ STRICT! │ - Reject unclear or non-paper-ready figures │
│ └──────┬──────┘ │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ Score ≥ 9? ──YES──► Accept & Output │
│ │ │
│ NO │
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ Generate SPECIFIC improvement feedback ──► Loop back to Step 2 │
│ │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Constants
- RENDERER =
codex-image2— Native image generation bridge exposed through local Codex app-server - OPTIONAL_TEXT_CRITIC =
mcp__codex__codex— Optional text-only second opinion for layout/style checks - MAX_ITERATIONS = 5 — Maximum refinement rounds
- TARGET_SCORE = 9 — Minimum acceptable score (1-10)
- OUTPUT_DIR =
figures/ai_generated/— Output directory - TEXT_LANGUAGE =
English— Default figure text language unless the user requests otherwise - NATIVE_IMAGE_REQUIREMENT =
strict— Accept only nativeimageGenerationoutput; reject shell/Python fallbacks - CANONICAL_HELPER =
python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py— Preflight, finalize, verify, and repair path for this integration
CVPR/ICLR/NeurIPS Top-Tier Conference Style Guide
What "CVPR Style" Actually Means:
Visual Standards
- Clean white background — No decorative patterns or gradients unless extremely subtle
- Sans-serif fonts — Arial, Helvetica, or similarly clean paper-friendly typography
- Subtle color palette — Use 3-5 coordinated colors, not rainbow colors
- Print-friendly — Must remain understandable in grayscale
- Professional borders — Thin to medium, clean, and consistent
Layout Standards
- Horizontal flow — Left-to-right is the default for pipelines
- Clear grouping — Use spacing or subtle grouping boxes for related modules
- Consistent sizing — Similar components should have similar sizes
- Balanced whitespace — Avoid both cramped and overly sparse layouts
Arrow Standards (MOST CRITICAL)
- Thick strokes — Arrows must remain visible after paper scaling
- Clear arrowheads — Large, unmistakable arrowheads
- Dark colors — Prefer black or dark gray arrows
- Labeled — Important arrows should show what flows through them
- No crossings — Reorganize the figure to avoid crossings where possible
- CORRECT DIRECTION — Arrows must point to the right target
Visual Appeal (Academic Professional Style)
目标:既不保守也不花哨,找到平衡点
✅ Should have
- Subtle gradients — Gentle same-family gradients are acceptable
- Rounded corners — Modern but restrained rounded blocks
- Clear hierarchy — Main modules larger, secondary modules smaller
- Consistent color coding — Stable mapping between module types and colors
- Professional typography — Clean labels with readable size hierarchy
❌ Avoid
- ❌ Rainbow gradients
- ❌ Heavy drop shadows
- ❌ 3D perspective effects
- ❌ Glowing effects
- ❌ Decorative clip-art icons
- ❌ Slide-deck styling that feels flashy rather than paper-ready
✓ Ideal effect
- Looks intentional, professional, and immediately readable
- Has moderate visual appeal without becoming decorative
- Feels appropriate for a top-tier conference paper figure
- Survives PDF scaling and grayscale printing
What to AVOID (CRITICAL)
- ❌ Thin, hairline arrows
- ❌ Unlabeled or ambiguous connections
- ❌ Tiny unreadable text
- ❌ Flat, boring box soup with no hierarchy
- ❌ Over-decorated figures with shadows/glows/icons
- ❌ Wrong arrow directions
Scope
| Figure Type | Quality | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture diagrams | Excellent | Model architecture, pipeline, encoder-decoder |
| Method illustrations | Excellent | Conceptual diagrams, algorithm flowcharts |
| Conceptual figures | Good | Comparison diagrams, taxonomy trees |
Not for: Statistical plots (use /paper-figure), deterministic vector topology figures (prefer /figure-spec), photo-realistic scenes
Workflow: MUST EXECUTE ALL STEPS
Step 0: Pre-flight Check
Render this checklist explicitly before starting:
📋 paper-illustration-image2 integration checklist:
[ ] 1. python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py preflight --workspace <cwd> --json-out figures/ai_generated/preflight.json
[ ] 2. Confirm preflight JSON says ok=true before rendering
[ ] 3. Render via mcp__codex-image2__generate_start + generate_status
[ ] 4. Finalize via python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py finalize --workspace <cwd> --best-image <best_png>
[ ] 5. Verify artifacts via python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py verify --workspace <cwd> --json-out figures/ai_generated/verify.json
- Create
figures/ai_generated/if it does not exist. - Confirm the request is suitable for a raster illustration:
- architecture diagram
- conceptual method figure
- workflow illustration
- Prefer English figure text unless the user asked otherwise.
- Run:
python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py preflight \
--workspace <cwd> \
--json-out figures/ai_generated/preflight.json
- If preflight is not
ok=true, stop and say so clearly.
Step 1: Claude Plans the Figure
Turn the user request into a fully specified image prompt. Include:
- figure type
- exact modules / stages
- flow direction
- labels to show
- data-flow arrows
- style constraints
- what to avoid
When the input is a method note or a paper section, summarize it first into a clean figure brief before writing the final image prompt.
Step 2: Layout Optimization
This step is required. Before rendering, refine the prompt into a concrete layout plan:
- exact module order
- spacing and grouping
- relative module prominence
- arrow routing and likely collision points
If mcp__codex__codex is available, you may ask it for a short second-opinion
layout critique here, but Claude should still complete this step even without
Codex.
Use Codex layout critique for:
- missing components
- confusing layout
- weak flow hierarchy
- likely arrow-direction ambiguity or clutter
Step 3: Style Verification
This step is also required. Check the prompt against the intended paper style before rendering:
- palette is restrained and academic
- arrows are thick, dark, and readable
- labels are concise and in English unless requested otherwise
- the figure will read clearly in grayscale / print
- no glow, rainbow gradient, or slide-deck decoration slips in
If mcp__codex__codex is available, you may ask it for a short text-only
style audit, but do not block on it.
Step 4: Generate Through the Bridge
Call mcp__codex-image2__generate_start with:
prompt: the final image promptcwd: current project root or paper workspaceoutputPath:figures/ai_generated/figure_v1.pngsystem: a short instruction likeAcademic paper figure. Prefer crisp English labels.timeoutSeconds: a bounded render timeout such as180
Then call mcp__codex-image2__generate_status with bounded waits until:
done=trueandstatus=completed, ordone=trueandstatus=failed
If generation fails, report the bridge error directly instead of hiding it.
Step 5: Review the Output
Review the generated image with a strict checklist:
- are all major components present?
- is the logical flow obvious?
- are labels readable?
- do arrows point the right way?
- does the figure look paper-ready rather than like a slide?
Score it from 1-10.
Step 6: Refine if Needed
If score < 9, write a targeted refinement prompt:
- say exactly what was wrong
- say what to preserve
- regenerate to
figure_v2.png,figure_v3.png, etc.
Keep refinement feedback concrete:
Increase spacing between genome scan and scoring modulesMake the off-target branch thinner and secondaryUse cleaner English labels: "Candidate sgRNA library", not "sgRNA library 23 bp"
Step 7: Finalize And Verify
When accepted:
- run the canonical helper to promote the best image to
figure_final.png - let the helper write
latex_include.tex - let the helper write
review_log.json - run helper verification before claiming success
python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py finalize \
--workspace <cwd> \
--best-image figures/ai_generated/figure_vN.png \
--score 9 \
--review-summary "Accepted after strict review; labels and arrows are paper-ready."
python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py verify \
--workspace <cwd> \
--json-out figures/ai_generated/verify.json
Suggested LaTeX:
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{figures/ai_generated/figure_final.png}
\caption{[Replace with a paper-ready caption].}
\label{fig:[replace-me]}
\end{figure*}
Key Rules
- Never skip Step 2 or Step 3; layout and style checks are required.
- Never skip the final visual review.
- Never accept a figure that is logically wrong just because it looks attractive.
- Use the
codex-image2bridge only for native image generation. - If the bridge says native image generation is unavailable, surface that honestly.
- Reject any shell/Python/manual bitmap fallback masquerading as image generation.
- Keep figure text in English unless the user requested another language.
- Prefer 1-3 strong refinement rounds over many shallow ones.
- Use specific, actionable refinement feedback instead of vague comments.
- Review arrow direction, label clarity, and visual hierarchy every round.
- Accept only figures that look paper-ready, not slide-ready.
- Always use
tools/paper_illustration_image2.py finalizeto emit the final artifacts. - Always use
tools/paper_illustration_image2.py verifybefore claiming success.
Repair Path
If rendering succeeded but final artifacts were skipped, repair the integration explicitly:
python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py finalize \
--workspace <cwd> \
--best-image figures/ai_generated/figure_vN.png
python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py verify \
--workspace <cwd> \
--json-out figures/ai_generated/verify.json
Output Structure
figures/ai_generated/
├── preflight.json # Helper preflight receipt
├── figure_v1.png # Iteration 1
├── figure_v2.png # Iteration 2
├── figure_v3.png # Iteration 3
├── figure_final.png # Accepted version (copy of best, score ≥ 9)
├── latex_include.tex # LaTeX snippet
├── review_log.json # Review notes and refinement history
└── verify.json # Helper verification diagnostic
Model Summary
| Stage | Agent / Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Step 0 | python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py preflight |
Observable activation predicate and preflight receipt |
| Step 1 | Claude | Parse request and create the initial figure prompt |
| Step 2 | Claude (+ optional Codex critique) | Refine layout, grouping, spacing, and arrow routing |
| Step 3 | Claude (+ optional Codex critique) | Verify academic visual style before rendering |
| Step 4 | mcp__codex-image2__generate_start + generate_status |
Native raster image generation through Codex app-server |
| Step 5 | Claude | Strict visual review and scoring |
| Step 7 | python3 tools/paper_illustration_image2.py finalize + verify |
Emit canonical artifacts and external verification receipt |
More from wanshuiyin/auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep
idea-creator
Generate and rank research ideas given a broad direction. Use when user says "找idea", "brainstorm ideas", "generate research ideas", "what can we work on", or wants to explore a research area for publishable directions.
134idea-discovery
Workflow 1: Full idea discovery pipeline. Orchestrates research-lit → idea-creator → novelty-check → research-review to go from a broad research direction to validated, pilot-tested ideas. Use when user says \"找idea全流程\", \"idea discovery pipeline\", \"从零开始找方向\", or wants the complete idea exploration workflow.
132auto-review-loop
Autonomous multi-round research review loop. Repeatedly reviews via Codex MCP, implements fixes, and re-reviews until positive assessment or max rounds reached. Use when user says "auto review loop", "review until it passes", or wants autonomous iterative improvement.
125research-lit
Search and analyze research papers, find related work, summarize key ideas. Use when user says "find papers", "related work", "literature review", "what does this paper say", or needs to understand academic papers.
123research-pipeline
Full research pipeline: Workflow 1 (idea discovery) → implementation → Workflow 2 (auto review loop) → Workflow 3 (paper writing, optional). Goes from a broad research direction all the way to a polished PDF. Use when user says \"全流程\", \"full pipeline\", \"从找idea到投稿\", \"end-to-end research\", or wants the complete autonomous research lifecycle.
122research-review
Get a deep critical review of research from GPT via Codex MCP. Use when user says "review my research", "help me review", "get external review", or wants critical feedback on research ideas, papers, or experimental results.
121