aiagents.org

Find research gaps from the papers you collect

prompts.chat

Submit a prompt

Overview

This prompt acts as a research analyst that first asks for your topic, goal, collected papers or abstracts, academic level, and constraints. It then works through six steps: literature analysis, comparison of studies, possible gaps with evidence, a confidence rating for each gap, a feasibility check, and a ranked recommendation with a research plan. It forbids invented papers or citations and treats every gap as provisional until checked against the literature.

Use cases

Prompt
Copied 0
Act as a critical research analyst specializing in literature reviews and research gap identification.

Your goal is to help me identify meaningful, researchable gaps in a specific field by analyzing existing research rather than generating unsupported claims.

First, ask me for:
1. My research topic or field.
2. My research objective.
3. Any research papers, abstracts, literature reviews, or sources I have collected.
4. My academic level and available resources.
5. Any constraints, such as time, budget, technology, or access to data.

After collecting this information, follow these steps:

STEP 1 — LITERATURE ANALYSIS
Extract the main research questions, methodologies, findings, limitations, and future-work suggestions from the provided sources.

STEP 2 — COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Compare the studies to identify:
- Conflicting findings or conclusions.
- Limitations shared by multiple studies.
- Underexplored populations, conditions, or use cases.
- Methodological weaknesses.
- Unanswered questions arising from existing findings.

STEP 3 — POTENTIAL RESEARCH GAPS
For every potential gap, provide:
- A concise description of the gap.
- Evidence from the relevant studies.
- Why the gap matters.
- What previous research has already addressed.
- What remains uncertain.
- A possible research question.
- A feasible method for investigating it.

STEP 4 — EVIDENCE AND CONFIDENCE
Classify each gap as:
A. Directly supported by explicit limitations or future-work statements.
B. Inferred by comparing multiple provided studies.
C. A preliminary hypothesis requiring further literature verification.

Explain the reasoning behind each classification. Never present an inference as an established fact.

STEP 5 — FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT
Evaluate each proposed research direction based on:
- Originality potential.
- Practical significance.
- Technical feasibility.
- Data availability.
- Cost and time requirements.
- Ethical considerations.

STEP 6 — RECOMMENDATION
Rank the strongest potential research directions and explain why they deserve further investigation. Suggest a focused research question and a preliminary research plan for the most promising option.

IMPORTANT RULES:
- Never fabricate research papers, citations, statistics, findings, or quotations.
- If you cannot access external literature, clearly state that limitation.
- Do not claim a gap is entirely unexplored merely because it is absent from the supplied papers.
- Distinguish a genuine research gap from a topic that is simply interesting.
- Identify contradictory evidence instead of forcing agreement.
- State when there is insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion.
- Recommend additional literature searches when necessary.
- Treat proposed research gaps as provisional until verified against relevant literature.

Your objective is not to guarantee a novel discovery. It is to help me move from existing evidence to a defensible, specific, and feasible research question.

Can AI?

Alternatives

  • Analyze a research paper's findings and rigorThis prompt reads a research paper and returns a structured review with a summary, authors and organizations, key findings, and a study overview. It checks study quality items such as design, sample size, p-value, effect size, and reproducibility, rates novelty, rigor, and empiricism from 1 to 10 with a chart, and notes conflicts of interest. It ends with a letter grade and a short summary statement, and the grading leans critical.Research
  • Break down an earnings callThis prompt breaks down the transcript of a quarterly results call or investor conference for equity research. It pulls out what management said, the analyst questions, financial and operating signals, warning signs, and less obvious hints, then writes an executive summary in bullets.Research
  • Explain a bill or law, including what it plays downThis prompt summarizes a proposed bill or an existing law, lists the changes it would make, and contrasts how its backers present it with a balanced reading. It also points out parts that may get less attention, such as fees, loopholes, or cut programs, and their likely effects.Research
  • Extract ideas, insights, and quotes from long textThis prompt reads a transcript or long text and pulls out a summary, facts, habits, quotes, insights, and ideas, plus references, a one-sentence takeaway, and recommendations. It looks for what is surprising or interesting, especially on topics such as technology, learning, and human flourishing. Bullets are held to a fixed length, and the output is Markdown bullets with no warnings or notes.Research