'assumptions' 검색 결과

First-principles strategy — strip away conventional assumptions and find the theoretical maximum for your business. Three modes. Diagnostic mode runs a full session (45+ min) to define your theoretical maximum, map the gap honestly, classify constraints, invert for failure modes, set strategic intent, and work backwards to your first intervention. Review mode (15-20 min) checks whether your theoretical maximum has shifted, whether the gap has changed, and whether you're still climbing the right peak. Alert mode defines constraint-shift, peak-shift, and local-peak triggers that tell you when to reassess. Use when someone is stuck optimising incrementally, when conventional wisdom is driving strategy, when a new technology or regulation changes what's physically possible, or when you suspect the business is climbing a local peak. Integrates with company-context.md. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Stress-test plans before committing by imagining they've already failed. Three modes. Diagnostic mode runs a full pre-mortem session — vivid failure scene-setting, six failure categories, the monkey test, and concrete plan adjustments. Review mode checks previous findings monthly for changed probabilities and new failure modes. Alert Triggers mode defines and monitors early warning signals across four trigger categories. Use before any major commitment — strategy, investment, product launch, partnership — or regularly to keep assumptions honest. The planning fallacy is real. The spreadsheet looked great so everyone stopped thinking. This is the antidote. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when work is ambiguous or has multiple viable paths; compares options, assumptions, evidence, tradeoffs, and the best next action.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Reviews a RAID log (risks, assumptions, issues, dependencies) line by line and returns a DRAFT review pack: which entries are stale, overdue, duplicated, ownerless, incomplete or misfiled, why, and a proposed update per line as current text against proposed text with the decision the project manager must take. Never re-rates, closes, merges or edits the log. Use when the user asks to "review the RAID log", "clean up the risk log", "health-check the RAID log before the steering meeting", "which risks are stale", "find duplicate risks" or "refresh the issue log". Do not use for setting up a new RAID log or logging a single new risk, issue or decision, use project-status-tracker instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Assembles a DRAFT capital expenditure request pack from the requester's inputs: business need, options including do nothing, costs exactly as provided, benefits as stated, risks, assumptions, budget status and the approvals route read from the organisation's own delegation of authority, with UNKNOWN for every missing figure, date or name. Use when the user asks to "prepare a capex request", "draft the business case for this equipment", "fill in the capital request form", "structure this investment proposal" or "what approvals does this spend need". Do not use for a board or committee decision paper, use board-paper-skeleton instead; for an IT change approval, use change-request-pack; to pressure-test a finished business case, use cfo-reviewer. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Have the second brain ask the owner five hard questions about their own long-held beliefs and codex entries that have not been revisited, so assumptions stop fossilizing. Monthly or on demand. Triggers: "/five-hard", "challenge my beliefs", "pressure-test my views".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when the user starts a non-trivial coding/building task in Claude Code (e.g. "帮我做个 X", "help me build Y", "add feature Z", "搭一个 Z"). Layers an AI-native pedagogical coat over normal coding work — surfaces implicit assumptions in user intent, annotates non-trivial design decisions inline with brief concept-scaffolding for terms the user may not know, and replaces "should I run it?" handoffs with rigorous AI self-verification plus a clean list of what only the user can verify. Skip for pure Q&A, single-line edits, read-only investigation, or refactoring along an existing pattern.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Crystallize shared understanding into a reviewable spec, or update an existing one. Use when the problem needs a written specification, when assumptions or decisions have changed, or when the user says 'write a spec'.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Econometrics skill for OLS regression and linear models. Activates when the user asks about: "run OLS", "linear regression", "ordinary least squares", "interpret regression results", "heteroskedasticity", "multicollinearity", "regression assumptions", "robust standard errors", "GLS", "WLS", "fit a regression model", "check regression diagnostics", "OLS假设", "最小二乘法", "线性回归", "回归系数", "残差检验", "异方差", "多重共线性", "普通最小二乘", "稳健标准误", "回归诊断"

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Knowledge base from the NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (NIST HB 151) — the practical statistics reference for engineering, metrology, and quality. Use for: exploratory data analysis and the four univariate assumptions (4-plot); measurement process characterization including bias/precision, calibration designs, gauge R&R, and ISO/GUM uncertainty budgets; production process characterization (stability vs. capability); process modeling and regression (LS/WLS/NLS/LOESS); design of experiments (screening, fractional/factorial, response-surface, Taguchi); statistical process control (Shewhart/CUSUM/EWMA charts, capability indices, acceptance sampling); product/process comparisons (hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for 1/2/3+ groups, ANOVA, multiple comparisons); and reliability (lifetime & repair-rate models, accelerated testing, reliability growth). Scope limits: this is applied frequentist statistics for measurement and quality — it does NOT reproduce the per-distribution formula galleries, worked case studies, datasets, plot images, or Dataplot/R code of the original web Handbook (those are described, not copied); it is thin on modern machine learning, Bayesian methods beyond conjugate reliability priors, time-series/forecasting, and Bayesian experimental design.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Knowledge base from the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (GAO-20-195G). Use for program cost estimating: the four characteristics of a reliable estimate (comprehensive, well documented, accurate, credible) and the 18 best practices; the 12-step cost estimating process (purpose, plan, technical baseline, WBS, ground rules and assumptions, data, point estimate, sensitivity, risk/uncertainty, document, present, update); estimating methods (analogy, parametric, engineering build-up, learning curves); Monte Carlo risk/uncertainty analysis, confidence levels and contingency; auditing and validating an estimate against the characteristics; earned value management (EIA-748, BCWS/BCWP/ACWP, CPI/SPI/TCPI, EAC, PMB, IBR); and specialized techniques (software cost estimating, learning curves, Analysis of Alternatives, WBS templates, the Green Book internal-control framework). This is the cost-estimating companion to the GAO Schedule and Technology Readiness Assessment guides. Does not cover schedule estimating/risk in depth (see the GAO Schedule Assessment Guide), agency-specific cost models, or the full text of referenced standards (EIA-748, MIL-STD-881D, the Green Book) — these are named, not reproduced.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Knowledge base from the NASA Cost Estimating Handbook (CEH) v4.0. Use for NASA's 12-step, three-part cost estimating process (Project Definition, Cost Methodology, Cost Estimate); the WBS, CADRe, and ONCE data backbone; estimating methodologies (analogy, parametric/CER, engineering build-up, EVM, Delphi); ground rules and assumptions, data normalization and inflation (BY/CY/RY); the point-estimate-to-S-curve cost-risk chain and Unallocated Future Expense (UFE) reserves; Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level (JCL) analysis via probabilistic cost-loaded schedules; decision-support analyses (sensitivity, trade studies, make/lease-vs-buy, affordability, CAIV); and economic analysis (discounting, NPV, OMB Circular A-94). The cost-estimating complement to NASA's SE and risk packs. Does NOT reproduce the handbook's tool-specific procedures, worked examples, or appendix-depth methods (it names the appendices), nor cover full DoD/GAO cost guides, schedule construction, or formal risk management beyond the cost interface.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Knowledge base from the FAA Requirements Engineering Management Handbook (DOT/FAA/AR-08/32). Use for writing requirements for real-time, embedded control systems — the avionics/medical slant — via the Handbook's eleven recommended practices: system overview and boundary (monitored/controlled variables), operational concepts (use cases), environmental assumptions, change-tolerant functional architecture (dependency diagrams), safety-driven architecture revision (FHA/PSSA/fault tree), system modes, detailed behavior and performance requirements (ideal value + tolerance + latency), the four-variable model bridge to software requirements (MON/CON/NAT/REQ, IN'/REQ'/OUT', DO-178B mapping), subsystem allocation, and rationale. Carries the Isolette Thermostat and Flight Control System worked examples. Slanted toward control systems with sensors and actuators; thin on information-system / enterprise / agile requirements, on requirements-management tooling, and on the formal-methods internals of SCR/RSML/SpecTRM (it names them, does not re-teach them). Does not reproduce the IEEE/DO-178B/ARP standards it cites.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply Karpathy-inspired coding behavior guidelines — think before coding, prefer simplicity, make surgical changes, and execute toward verifiable goals. Reduces wrong assumptions, overengineering, and unintended side-effects.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiabl

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Audit Bing search visibility, Webmaster Tools evidence, and IndexNow readiness when authorized tools are available. Use for Bing indexing, link, crawl, or Microsoft search visibility work; not for Google indexing assumptions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Analyze channel and campaign contribution using explicit attribution assumptions, reconciliation across systems, incrementality where possible, and confidence labels.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Design valid marketing experiments with hypotheses, primary metrics, guardrails, sample/traffic assumptions, implementation QA and decision rules.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Design and evaluate paid-ad experiments with hypotheses, randomization units, sample-size and duration assumptions, guardrails, platform experiment tools, analysis, and decision rules. Use for A/B test, split test, experiment design, hypothesis, statistical significance, sample size, test duration, or experiment readout.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Present and apply contradiction fixes one-by-one, flag assumptions, run consistency checks, and write propagation record

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Senior Kotlin specialist code review — framework-agnostic. Use whenever the user asks to review, audit, critique, or get feedback on Kotlin code, a file, a class, a function, a module, a diff, a branch, a commit, or a pull request. Judges Kotlin language idioms, logic correctness, architecture and layering, concurrency (coroutines, Flow, structured concurrency, cancellation, race conditions), null safety, exception safety, testability, performance, and security. Detects force-unwraps, unchecked casts, GlobalScope, leaked mutability, broken structured concurrency, hidden side effects, weak abstractions, untestable seams, allocation hot spots, weak crypto, input-validation gaps, and PII logging. Outputs prioritized findings with file:line anchors and minimal-diff fixes. No assumptions about DI framework, UI framework, or build system.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Flip core assumptions to reveal hidden constraints and alternative approaches - "what if the opposite were true?

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Stress-tests ideas by surfacing assumptions, counterarguments, and confidence gaps. Use when evaluating claims, proposals, plans, or decisions that need rigorous intellectual scrutiny.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when user is part of a plural system — provides warm session check-in for who is fronting and maintains a simple JSON session log. No clinical language, no assumptions about system structure.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.