name: phd-proposal description: Write, structure, or review a PhD/Master's research proposal. Use when drafting a research proposal, preparing for committee review, writing a thesis outline, or aligning methodology with academic requirements. metadata: tags: ["research", "phd", "proposal", "methodology", "committee"] version: 1.0.0 triggers: - "Write research proposal" - "PhD proposal" - "Thesis proposal" - "Help me write my proposal" - "Proposal structure" - "Committee review preparation"
PhD/Master's Research Proposal
Structure and write a rigorous research proposal that satisfies committee requirements.
Standard Proposal Structure (IEEE/ACM CS)
1. Title & Abstract (~200 words)
2. Introduction (~500 words)
3. Related Work (~800 words)
4. Research Questions (~200 words)
5. Methodology (~1000 words) ← most important
6. Preliminary Results (~500 words, if any)
7. Timeline & Milestones (table/Gantt)
8. Expected Contributions (~300 words)
9. References (BibTeX)
Section-by-Section Guidance
1. Title & Abstract
Title formula: [Method/Approach] for [Problem] in [Domain/Context]
Example: "Federated Multi-Level Feedback Queue Scheduling for Resource-Constrained Healthcare IoT Networks"
Abstract (one paragraph, no citations, no math):
[Context]: In [domain], [background challenge].
[Gap]: However, [specific gap from literature].
[Approach]: We propose [method name], which [key idea].
[Validation]: We evaluate on [datasets/benchmarks] using [metrics].
[Impact]: Results show [expected outcome], enabling [application].
2. Introduction
- Hook: real-world motivation (1 paragraph)
- Background: what exists (1 paragraph)
- Problem: specific gap (1 paragraph)
- Solution sketch: your approach (1 paragraph)
- Contributions: bulleted list (use
research-questionoutput) - Thesis structure: "Chapter 2 covers..."
3. Related Work
Organize by taxonomy (not chronologically):
3.1 [Approach A] — summarize 3-5 papers, explain why insufficient
3.2 [Approach B] — same
3.3 [Your positioning] — "Unlike X, we address Y by Z"
4. Research Questions
- State main RQ + 2-4 sub-questions (paste from
research-questionskill output) - Each sub-question should be answerable in ~1 chapter/paper
5. Methodology (Most Critical)
5.1 Research Paradigm Choose and justify:
- Quantitative / Qualitative / Mixed
- Paradigm: Design Science Research (DSR) / Experimental / Simulation
5.2 System/Model Design
Input: [what]
Processing: [how — algorithm, model, framework]
Output: [what]
Assumption: [what you assume]
5.3 Experimental Protocol
Datasets: [name, size, source, why chosen]
Baselines: [method1, method2 — why these are fair comparisons]
Metrics: [primary metric] + [secondary metrics]
Evaluation protocol: [k-fold CV / train-val-test split / simulation rounds]
Statistical tests: [t-test / Wilcoxon / effect size — for significance]
5.4 Reproducibility Plan
- Code: GitHub repo (public after publication)
- Environment: Docker / conda environment file
- Seeds: fixed random seeds
- Hardware: specify GPU/CPU specs
6. Preliminary Results
Include if you have any early experiments. Even partial results strengthen the proposal.
- 1-2 preliminary experiments showing feasibility
- Small-scale validation of core idea
- If none: state "Preliminary experiments are planned for Month 3-4"
7. Timeline & Milestones
For a 2-year Master's program (align with milestone-tracker skill):
| Phase | Activity | Duration | Milestone |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Literature review | Month 1-2 | Gap matrix complete |
| 2 | Method design | Month 2-4 | Architecture finalized |
| 3 | Implementation | Month 3-8 | Working prototype |
| 4 | Experiments | Month 7-14 | Results table complete |
| 5 | Writing | Month 13-18 | Draft thesis/paper |
| 6 | Revision | Month 17-21 | Submission ready |
| 7 | Defense | Month 22-23 | Defended ✓ |
8. Expected Contributions
Restate from research-question skill, add:
- Theoretical contribution (if any)
- Practical contribution (system, dataset, tool)
- Publication targets (venues + tier)
Committee Checklist
Before submitting proposal for committee review:
- Problem is clearly stated in 1-2 sentences
- Gap is supported by ≥3 recent papers
- RQ is specific and measurable
- Methodology is detailed enough to replicate
- Baselines are state-of-the-art, fairly chosen
- Timeline is realistic (pad 20% for delays)
- Limitations are acknowledged
- Ethical considerations addressed (IRB, data privacy)
Output Format
Produce a structured Markdown document following the section order above. Export to LaTeX using the paper-writing skill templates.
Links to Other Skills
- Requires →
sota-survey+research-question - Feeds into →
research-design(methodology details) - Feeds into →
milestone-tracker(timeline) - Feeds into →
paper-writing(proposal becomes thesis chapters)