Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

consistency-auditor

Run scoped or final cross-media consistency checks for mathematical-modeling artifacts, comparing canonical numbers, symbols, parameters, decisions, files, and paper claims without performing full-workspace audits for low-risk changes.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md2.2 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Modes

  • scoped: run only for a CANONICAL or FROZEN change and only for affected Qx/identifiers.
  • final: run across all submission artifacts before assembly.

Sources of Truth

Prefer:

  • frozen_numbers.json for paper numbers;
  • qx_decisions.jsonl for human judgments;
  • planning/symbol_table.md for symbols/units;
  • approved code plan and run summary for parameters and executed methods;
  • solution package for writer-facing structure.

Use legacy decision logs or Markdown reviews only during migration.

Checks

  1. Numerical claims match frozen values and units.
  2. Formula, parameter, constraint, and method roles match approved code and plan.
  3. Symbols and units match the global symbol table.
  4. Referenced tables, figures, code, and data files exist.
  5. Why-this-method, result verdict, stability, confidence, and claim scope resolve to human decision IDs.
  6. Freeze and decisions are not stale relative to materially changed cited evidence.

Scoped Workflow

  1. Receive changed files/identifiers and their impact class.
  2. Resolve affected Qx and downstream consumers.
  3. Check only those relationships.
  4. Return a compact digest or save results/Qx/reports/scoped_consistency.json when durable evidence is needed.
  5. Do not rewrite other artifacts.

Final Workflow

  1. Check all submission Qx.
  2. Save paper/audits/cross_media_consistency_audit.md.
  3. Report PASSED, FAILED, or NOT_RUN.
  4. List concrete divergences and repair owners. Do not pad a pass list.

Rules

  • Do not run a full audit for formatting, comments, scratch work, or ordinary pre-freeze exploration.
  • Do not infer canonical numbers from the paper.
  • Do not repair divergences inside the audit.
  • Do not approve final assembly directly.

Verification

  • Scope matches the semantic impact.
  • Every divergence identifies source, consumer, and expected repair.
  • Final audit covers all six check classes.
  • Verdict follows actual evidence rather than an item count.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Detect whether approved modeling code is Python or MATLAB/Beita Tianyuan and route it to the matching reviewer using the compact named-check review contract.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1.1KUpdated Sep 24, 2026

Audit whether the semantic evidence required by the active lean or submission profile exists and is current, without requiring one verbose artifact per skill or an arbitrary number of pass bullets.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1.1KUpdated Sep 24, 2026

Map contest attachments to subquestions, audit and clean raw data, and emit one reusable data profile with quality, coverage, imbalance, concentration, and method-readiness evidence for downstream risk screening.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1.1KUpdated Sep 24, 2026

Build one compact choice card at a genuine mathematical-modeling judgment point. Use before method screening, after a meaningful experiment, or before final claim/freeze approval so the human chooses the trade-off while AI handles mechanical consequences.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1.1KUpdated Sep 24, 2026

Plan the smallest set of diagnostic, comparison, paper, and appendix figures or tables needed to support verified mathematical-modeling decisions and claims.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1.1KUpdated Sep 24, 2026

Build the authoritative final method explanation for a submission-ready subquestion from the method card, human decision ledger, code plan, final results, and robustness evidence.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

zhnnky329/MathModeling-skills1.1KUpdated Sep 24, 2026

See all skills by zhnnky329

Report a problem with this skill