'complexity' 검색 결과

ChIP-seq quality control metrics including FRiP (Fraction of Reads in Peaks), cross-correlation analysis (NSC/RSC), library complexity, and IDR (Irreproducibility Discovery Rate) for replicate concordance. Use to assess experiment quality before downstream analysis. Use when assessing ChIP-seq data quality metrics.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply John Ousterhout-inspired software design rules when reducing complexity, designing module boundaries, or reviewing APIs and abstractions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply Tesler's Law — every process has irreducible complexity that someone must absorb. Use when deciding whether the product or the user carries it. For reducing apparent choice, use `hicks-law`.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Reviews code diffs and files for security vulnerabilities (OWASP Top 10), error handling, complexity, naming conventions, and performance issues. Use when the user asks to review a PR, pull request, diff, merge request, or code changes.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Model selection by provider health, not task complexity. Tier 0 (local) handles most tasks. Paid models are break-glass only. Fallbacks activate on 429 or timeout — never on perceived task difficulty.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Guides an end-to-end data-warehouse migration to Amazon Redshift — discovery, schema/SQL/stored-procedure/macro/script conversion, data migration, validation, performance comparison, and reporting. Source-routed via `references/<source>/`; Teradata (Vantage) is the supported source; additional sources are added as their own `references/<source>/` sets. Text-only knowledge (no executable code) — the AI generates all execution at runtime. Applies when a user wants to migrate Teradata to Amazon Redshift, convert Teradata DDL/SQL/stored procedures/macros/BTEQ to Redshift/RSQL, or assess Teradata-to-Redshift migration complexity. Applies only to migrations targeting Amazon Redshift; migrations to other platforms (Snowflake, BigQuery, Databricks, etc.) are out of scope regardless of source. Does not cover general Redshift administration, performance tuning, or troubleshooting of existing Redshift clusters (no migration involved), or sources not listed under references/.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Analyze and reduce avoidable Attio integration cost and load by measuring request volume, query complexity, synchronization churn, and retained data before changing architecture. Use when an Attio workload is wasteful or operationally expensive. Trigger with "Attio cost", "reduce Attio API usage", or "Attio sync efficiency".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply foundational design principles: affordances, signifiers, constraints, feedback, and conceptual models. Use when the user mentions "why is this confusing", "affordance", "error prevention", "discoverability", "human-centered design", "mental model", "mapping", "seven stages of action", "users keep making mistakes", "this is unintuitive", or "people cant figure out how to use it". Also trigger when reducing product complexity or feature creep. Covers the gulfs of execution and evaluation. For usability scoring, see ux-heuristics. For iOS-specific patterns, see ios-hig-design.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Apply named refactoring transformations to improve code structure without changing behavior. Use when the user mentions "refactor this", "code smells", "extract method", "replace conditional", "technical debt", "move method", "inline variable", "decompose conditional", or "clean up this messy code". Also trigger when cleaning up legacy code, preparing code for new features by restructuring, or identifying which transformation fits a specific code smell. Covers smell-driven refactoring, safe transformation sequences, and testing guards. For code-quality foundations, see clean-code. For managing complexity, see software-design-philosophy.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Model software around the business domain using bounded contexts, aggregates, and ubiquitous language. Use when the user mentions "domain modeling", "bounded context", "aggregate root", "ubiquitous language", "anti-corruption layer", "context mapping", "domain events", "strategic design", "the code doesnt match the business", or "how do we split this big system". Also trigger when breaking a monolith into services, defining service boundaries, or aligning code structure with business processes. Covers entities vs value objects, domain events, and context mapping strategies. For architecture layers, see clean-architecture. For complexity, see software-design-philosophy.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Detects methodological gaps across study design, analysis, validation, bias control, reproducibility, and implementation readiness within a biomedical research area. Use this skill when a user wants to identify what current studies are still methodologically missing, which weaknesses are most consequential, and what upgrade path would produce a stronger next-step study. Always separate design gaps, analysis gaps, validation gaps, and reproducibility gaps. Never treat technical complexity as methodological rigor.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when evaluating Seth Klarman-style deep value and distressed opportunities: extreme margin of safety, forced sellers, liquidity discounts, complexity, downside protection, and patience.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Complexity-based task routing with Q-Learning optimization, Agent Booster WASM fast-path, and Mixture-of-Experts model selection.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Launch an intelligent sub-agent with automatic model selection based on task complexity, specialized agent matching, Zero-shot CoT reasoning, and mandatory self-critique verification

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Reflect on previus response and output, based on Self-refinement framework for iterative improvement with complexity triage and verification

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Triage an incoming insurance claim: check the coverage trigger against policy wording, band severity and complexity, screen for fraud indicators, set a first-pass reserve range, and route with an SLA. Use when asked to triage a claim, review a first notice of loss (FNOL), assess a new claim, decide fast-track vs adjuster routing, or screen a claim for SIU referral. Produces a structured triage note with coverage view, severity band, indicator screen, reserve range, and a routing recommendation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Review changed code for naming, stale references, unnecessary complexity, and comment quality. Use after completing implementation work, before committing, or when the user asks to review or audit code.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Use when defining ambiguous or high-complexity new features, product behavior, UI/component design, architecture choices, contract changes, or when grilling/pressure-testing a plan or design. Routine small requests stay on the fast path.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

AI code quality checks. The Big 5: input validation, edge cases, error handling, duplication, complexity. Triggers: quality, big 5, ai code, review, validate.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Collect and assess quality metrics for Simulink models using the metric.Engine API. Use when evaluating model design quality (maintainability, complexity, architecture) or testing completeness (unit testing, SIL, PIL, coverage, pass rates) after edits or test runs. Covers metric discovery, collection, report generation, and diagnostics. Triggers on: "collect metrics", "quality metrics", "metric.Engine", "testing metrics", "maintainability metrics", "SIL metrics", "PIL metrics", "what metrics are available", "assess quality", "coverage metrics", "generate metric report", "diagnose metric errors".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Analyze code coverage and CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) scores to identify high-risk code. Use OpenCover format with ReportGenerator for Risk Hotspots showing cyclomatic complexity and untested code paths.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Turns Hi-C/Micro-C FASTQ into a deduplicated, filtered .pairs file with pairtools and decides whether the library worked. Covers the bwa mem -SP5M / bwa-mem2 / chromap --preset hic alignment idiom (mates mapped as independent single-end reads), pairtools parse vs parse2 and the walks-policy choice (5unique pairwise vs all for Pore-C/Micro-C concatemers), pair-type classification (keep UU and rescued UC), dedup (PCR vs optical/by-tile), select by pair_type/MAPQ/distance, restriction-fragment handling (restrict, Arima dual-enzyme, Micro-C/DNase fragment-free), and allele-specific phasing (pairtools phase to two coolers). The library-QC decision uses % long-range cis as the one-number quality metric, trans as the noise floor, orientation balance as fragment-map-free dangling-end/self-circle QC, and % duplicates as a complexity proxy. Use when processing Hi-C/Micro-C/Omni-C reads into pairs, judging library quality, handling multi-enzyme or restriction-agnostic protocols, or generating allele-specific contacts.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Aligns and QCs methylated-RNA-immunoprecipitation (MeRIP / m6A-seq) IP and input libraries using STAR or HISAT2 splice-aware mapping, samtools sort/index, IP/input matched-pair tracking, antibody-lot metadata recording, replicate concordance via deepTools multiBamSummary + plotCorrelation, IP enrichment QC via plotFingerprint and per-transcript IP/input ratio distributions, library-complexity saturation curves via PreSeq, and the explicit do-NOT-deduplicate convention for standard non-UMI MeRIP. Use when preparing paired IP and input BAM files for exomePeak2 / MeTPeak / MACS3 peak calling, evaluating MeRIP replicate concordance and IP enrichment, deciding whether to deduplicate (standard MeRIP typically NOT), choosing genome-vs-transcriptome alignment for downstream peak vs m6Anet workflows, recording antibody clone and lot metadata for cross-batch reconciliation, detecting failed IPs via saturation curves and IP/input distribution shape, or generating IP-over-Input bigWig tracks for visualisation.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

Quality control for pooled CRISPR screens covering library representation, Gini index, log-skew, replicate Pearson and Spearman concordance, essentialome precision-recall AUC against CEGv2 (Hart 2017), Cas9 cut-toxicity diagnostics, copy-number amplicon detection (Aguirre 2016 / Munoz 2016), bottleneck propagation through plasmid pool, infection, selection, and endpoint stages, MOI verification, and DepMap-style screen-quality scoring. Use when assessing screen quality before hit calling, deciding whether to repeat or rescue a screen, diagnosing low-confidence hits, choosing between MAGeCK / BAGEL2 / Chronos based on quality grade, picking a normalization strategy from QC signatures, or evaluating whether an in-vivo screen retained adequate library complexity.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.