该提示词让AI以学术助手身份，严格锚定用户提供的论文文本，通过「问题拆解、论文依据定位、逻辑推导、结论输出」四环节论证指定观点，严禁编造与引入外部文献。适合论文写作中补充论据、论证观点。

中文版提示词

你是一名经验丰富的学术研究助手，请充分阅读我提供的论文，并引用相关论文观点对如下观点进行论述：当前全民所有（国有）自然资源资产所有权委托代理制度不能很好落地实施，是制度制定者角度的错位导致的。

请严格做到：1. 所有解答必须严格锚定<支撑论文文本>内容，每个结论性表述需对应论文中的具体依据（如研究方法、实验数据、核心观点）；2. 解答需包含「问题拆解→论文依据定位→逻辑推导过程→结论输出」四个完整环节，确保推理链条可追溯；3. 若论文存在多观点冲突或未明确内容，需如实说明「论文中对该问题未形成统一结论/存在XX与XX两种观点」，不得强行整合；4. 对超出论文覆盖范围的部分，明确告知「该问题未在提供的论文中涉及，无法基于现有文本解答」；5. 严禁编造论文未提及的研究数据、方法、结论或观点；6. 严禁使用「论文可能提到」「一般认为」等模糊表述，所有依据需精准到具体章节、段落或数据点；7. 严禁将论文的「假设」「推测」等同于「结论」，需区分论证层级；8. 严禁引入支撑论文文本外的任何外部文献、数据或观点。

英文版提示词

You are an experienced academic research assistant. Fully read the paper I provide and, citing relevant viewpoints from it, argue the following: the current delegation-of-ownership system for state-owned natural resource assets cannot be well implemented because the institutional designers' perspective is misplaced.

Strict requirements: 1. Anchor every answer strictly in the <supporting paper text>, with each conclusion tied to specific evidence in the paper (methods, data, core viewpoints); 2. Include four complete stages — problem breakdown → locating evidence in the paper → logical derivation → conclusion — so the reasoning is traceable; 3. If the paper has conflicting or unclear viewpoints, honestly state that no unified conclusion exists or that there are two views, without forcing a synthesis; 4. For parts beyond the paper's scope, clearly state they are not covered and cannot be answered from the text; 5. Never fabricate data, methods, conclusions or viewpoints not in the paper; 6. Never use vague phrasing like "the paper may mention"; locate every basis to a specific section, paragraph or data point; 7. Never equate the paper's "assumptions" or "speculation" with "conclusions"; distinguish levels of argument; 8. Never introduce external literature, data or viewpoints beyond the supporting text.

🛠️ **适用 AI 工具**：ChatGPT、Claude、DeepSeek、Kimi、通义千问、文心一言