Spaces:
Sleeping
Sleeping
| # Roadmap | |
| qalmsw is focused on pre-submission QA for scientific LaTeX manuscripts. The | |
| near-term goal is to make the deterministic checks strong enough for CI, and the | |
| LLM-backed checks useful enough for private local review before authors submit. | |
| ## Current priorities | |
| - Keep deterministic artifact, citation, image, and figure/table checks fast and | |
| suitable for CI. | |
| - Improve JSON output and add SARIF output so editors, GitHub Actions, and review | |
| tools can annotate exact manuscript lines. | |
| - Expand reference verification beyond arXiv and DOI checks with better fallbacks | |
| for Semantic Scholar, Crossref, and OpenAlex. | |
| - Build a small public regression corpus of synthetic LaTeX manuscripts that cover | |
| hallucinated references, placeholder content, missing figures, and unsupported | |
| claims. | |
| - Publish reproducible releases with changelogs and pinned test results. | |
| ## Codex/API Credit Plan | |
| OpenAI's Codex open source programs ask how API credits would support project work. | |
| For qalmsw, credits would be used for bounded maintainer automation and evaluation, | |
| not for sending users' manuscripts to hosted services by default. | |
| Planned uses: | |
| - Generate and review checker test cases from synthetic LaTeX fixtures. | |
| - Compare checker output across models and prompts before releases. | |
| - Prototype SARIF/GitHub Actions annotations for manuscript review workflows. | |
| - Triage issues and draft pull-request reviews for community contributions. | |
| - Build release notes and migration notes from merged changes. | |
| User-facing checks should continue to support local llama.cpp by default. Hosted API | |
| usage belongs in maintainer workflows, opt-in experiments, or clearly documented | |
| integrations. | |
| ## Funding Application Draft | |
| Short project description: | |
| > qalmsw is an open-source Python CLI that checks scientific LaTeX manuscripts for | |
| > LLM artifacts, placeholder text, hallucinated references, missing figures, citation | |
| > problems, and unsupported claims before submission. | |
| How credits would be used: | |
| > API credits would fund maintainer automation: synthetic LaTeX regression fixtures, | |
| > checker evaluation, issue/PR triage, release-note drafting, and CI annotation | |
| > prototypes. The user CLI remains local-first with llama.cpp; hosted API use is for | |
| > project maintenance and opt-in integrations. | |