「revision」の検索結果

Refine academic writing for computer science research papers targeting top-tier venues (NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML, AAAI, IJCAI, ACL, EMNLP, NAACL, CVPR, WWW, KDD, SIGIR, CIKM, and similar). Use this skill whenever a user asks to improve, polish, refine, edit, or proofread academic or research writing — including paper drafts, abstracts, introductions, related work sections, methodology descriptions, experiment write-ups, or conclusion sections. Also trigger when users paste LaTeX content and ask for writing help, mention "camera-ready", "rebuttal", "paper revision", or reference any academic venue or conference. This skill handles both full paper refinement and section-by-section editing.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use for sensemaking, frame revision, anomaly handling, questioning strategy, and ambiguity diagnosis with the Data/Frame model before action is chosen. NOT for deterministic classification, settled execution planning, or situations where the frame is already stable.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

[AI & Tools] Use when you need to apply structured, reflective problem-solving for complex tasks requiring multi-step analysis, revision capability, and hypothesis verification.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when a user asks to polish, rewrite, humanize, de-AI, localize, or oralize Chinese writing, including short-video scripts, articles, social posts, speeches, newsletters, and personal-IP content. The skill diagnoses “AI味”, preserves the user's meaning, adapts to optional style samples, replaces translation-like phrasing with natural Chinese expression, and outputs a polished version plus concise revision notes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Design, audit, harden, review, or upgrade MCP servers and MCP Apps with revision-aware protocol profiles, explicit HTTP/deployment boundaries, capability-centered validation, bilingual reporting, and reproducible evidence. Use for MCP server architecture, JSON-RPC or Streamable HTTP bugs, security hardening, protocol-version migration, MCP Apps widget boundaries, review reconciliation, test planning, and public engineering evidence.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Validate and implement Sinclair ZX81 video emulation in the EMULATORS repository for /mZX811, /mZX812, and /mZX813, including ULA character generation, Z80 display-file execution, M1/refresh/HALT/INT behavior, scanline timing, HSYNC/VSYNC, NMI generator and WAIT synchronization, SLOW and FAST modes, PAL/NTSC margins, collapsed display files, inverse video, high-resolution techniques, ROM-version interactions, and ULA revision boundaries. Use when Codex reviews or edits namespace ZX81 ULA, ULARegisters, MemoryVideoCode, Memory, PortManager, Screen, CPU interrupt timing, raster, ROM-specific video flow, or ZX81 video tests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Validate and implement Sinclair ZX Spectrum 16K/48K ULA and board-level behavior in the EMULATORS repository, including PAL/NTSC raster timing, bitmap and attribute fetches, FLASH/BRIGHT/INK/PAPER rendering, CPU clock generation, lower-RAM and I/O contention, floating bus, snow effect, DRAM addressing and refresh, port FE keyboard/tape/border/sound behavior, interrupts, and ULA revision boundaries. Use when Codex reviews or edits namespace ZXSPECTRUM ULA, ULARegisters, Memory, PortManager, Screen, Sound, Datasette, Z80 bus timing, raster, contention, or ZX Spectrum hardware tests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Simulates academic peer review, evaluating papers across Originality, Methodology, Results, and Writing to provide Major/Minor Revision recommendations with actionable feedback. Triggers when a user asks to "review my paper," "simulate peer review," or "give my paper a peer review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from NIST SP 800-37 Revision 2, the Risk Management Framework (RMF) for information systems and organizations. Use for the seven RMF steps (Prepare, Categorize, Select, Implement, Assess, Authorize, Monitor) and their tasks; the three-tier organization-wide risk model; authorization boundaries; the requirements-to-controls relationship; security categorization (FIPS 199/200 high-water mark) and control selection/tailoring (SP 800-53/53B baselines); assessment, the authorization decision and risk acceptance, continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization; the security/privacy distinction; and supply chain risk management. This is the security-and-privacy-risk-governance edge of systems engineering — it governs how much protection and whether to accept residual risk, complementing the disciplines that decide how protection is built. Does NOT reproduce the SP 800-53 control catalog or its baselines, the FIPS impact tables, or the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text; it names and routes to them rather than restating them.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from the NASA Schedule Management Handbook (2024 edition, Revision 2). Use for program/project schedule management of aerospace and large engineering efforts: the five sub-functions (Planning, Development, Assessment & Analysis, Maintenance & Control, Documentation & Communication); the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and the WBS/OBS/CBS breakdown structures; the Schedule Management Plan (SMP) and Basis of Estimate (BoE); Critical Path Method, logic, durations, float and margin; tiered schedule assessment (Requirements/Health/Basis checks, the Shock Test) and the Dimensions of Schedule Reliability; Schedule Risk Analysis (SRA), Integrated Cost-Schedule Risk Analysis (ICSRA), Monte Carlo, correlation, merge bias, and the Joint Confidence Level (JCL); baselining, replan vs. rebaseline, EVM schedule metrics (SPI, BEI, CEI, HMI, Earned Schedule, CPLI), and status/progress/forecast reporting. This is NASA's scheduling doctrine grounded in NPR 7120.5 and the GAO Schedule Assessment Guide. Thin on the underlying mechanics of CPM, statistics, and EVM (it points to companion handbooks); aerospace/space-flight-centric; anchored to the 2024 second edition.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from NASA-STD-8729.1A — NASA's R&M (Reliability and Maintainability) standard covering spaceflight and support systems (Revision A, 2017-06-13). Use for NASA's objectives-driven R&M framework — the R&M objectives hierarchy (one Top Objective decomposed into four sub-objectives, paired with tailorable strategies), how R&M requirements are established inside the SMA Plan required by NPR 7120.5, the SMA Technical Authority concurrence/independent-evaluation governance, milestone vs. readiness review gates, the reliability/maintainability/availability vocabulary (Ai vs. Ao, the failure causal chain, risk as a triplet), and the R&M Evidentiary Methods catalogue (FMEA/FMECA, FTA, RBDA, RCM, LORA, plus the space-environment and parts-pedigree analyses). Scoped to NASA spaceflight and support systems and to assurance planning: it is an objectives-and-strategies standard, so it deliberately does NOT prescribe step-by-step analysis procedures (those live in the referenced NASA Preferred Reliability Practices) and is thin on facility R&M, detailed math/derivations, and non-NASA or commercial life cycles.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from FAA-HDBK-006D (2020), the FAA's System Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) Handbook for National Airspace System (NAS) hardware and software. Use for RMA figures of merit (MTBF, MTBO, MTTR, the availability variants), the bathtub curve and probability distributions, the four-stage RMA lifecycle mapped to the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS), the six-task RMA technical-management/acquisition process, service-thread criticality and the NAS-RD severity-to-target table, the RMA analysis toolbox (RBD, FMEA/FMECA, FTA, Ishikawa, Monte Carlo, Bayesian, FRACAS, ALT, reliability-growth/recovery tests), software reliability (early prediction + reliability growth), and tailorable example RMA requirements for a Program Requirements Document. Scope limits: it is FAA/NAS-specific guidance (not a requirement, by its own statement), centred on hardware-plus-software availability — it brackets out human/service/facility/communications availability, names but does not reproduce the math derivations or external standards (MIL-STDs, IEEE 1633, RTCA DO-178C/DO-278A, SAE JA1011), is thin on detailed worked numerical examples and on safety-case method, and predates any current revision beyond 006D.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Knowledge base from FAA-STD-025f (Preparation of Interface Documentation). Use for IRD/ICD family definitions, common format and content, IRD shall-requirements, ICD design characteristics, verification/VRTM, and CM/revision/approval of FAA Enterprise Subsystem interfaces. Covers rev F preparation rules only; does not replace FAA-STD-005 drawing/spec prep, Order 1800.66 full CM procedures, or non-FAA interface standards.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Turns the text of a regulatory change (new regulation, amendment, rule, guidance or standard revision) into a DRAFT impact note: what changed against the prior text where supplied, who is affected as the text scopes it, an obligations table with dates and owners to confirm, and open interpretation questions for legal. States only what the text says; the rest is UNKNOWN. Use when the user asks to "brief legal on this new regulation", "list what we must do by when under this amendment", "compare the new standard with the version it replaces", "turn this directive into an obligations table" or "what does this rule mean for us". Do not use for assessing existing controls against a requirement set, use controls-gap-pack instead; for gapping a policy against a standard, use policy-gap-review. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Checks a master document register extract for gaps and returns a DRAFT question list for document control: missing or out-of-sequence revisions, overdue or slipping deliverables, numbering that breaks the project convention, duplicates and incomplete rows, each with row, test and quoted evidence. Never edits the register, re-baselines a date or marks a deliverable complete. Use when the user asks to "check the MDR", "find the gaps in the deliverables list" or "prepare questions on the drawing register". Do not use for drafting a transmittal from a document list, use transmittal-drafter instead. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Proposes the piping content a P&ID adds to an accepted PFD process model: line inventory with off-page continuity and required ancillary lines, line identification elements per the project line numbering procedure, connection items at nozzles matched to a quoted schedule, per quoted standards, specification break questions and observations. Every proposal cites its source and revision; no source, no proposal; never sizes a line or selects a class. Use when the user asks to "run the piping enrichment", "start the discipline enrichment", "list the lines the P&ID adds to this PFD" or "fill the line identifiers from the numbering procedure" after gate G2. Do not use for instruments, loops or instrument tags, use instrumentation-and-control-enrichment instead; do not use before gate G2, use process-model-check. Drafts for human review; never approves, authorises or signs off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build a complete but efficient Nature-style Chinese PPTX presentation from a remote-sensing, Earth-observation, geospatial AI, or broader scientific paper, preprint, PDF, article text, abstract, figure legends, or reading notes. Use this skill whenever the user asks to make slides/PPT/PPTX for journal club, group meeting, paper sharing, thesis seminar, lab meeting, department report, or academic presentation from a remote-sensing research paper. It identifies the paper type and argument, selects only the figures needed for the story, writes Chinese slide content and speaker notes, creates the actual .pptx deck, and runs an explicit self-review/corrective revision loop focused on figure quality, text overflow prevention, and non-template visual design before delivery. Also trigger on general academic-presentation requests even without the word "Nature", such as turning a paper into slides, building an academic talk deck, conference/defense presentations, and Chinese phrasings like 论文做PPT、遥感论文汇报、组会PPT、文献汇报、学术汇报、做幻灯片、讲paper、读书报告PPT.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the user asks to "log this launch", query a launch date/embargo, record a stage transition, or update submissions/outcomes; curates launch facts through the append-only launches event stream with optimistic revisions and derived dossier/calendar views. Not for RAMP scoring — use launch-readiness-auditor; not for planning tier/window — use launch-tier-planner. 发布台账/发布日历/阶段与禁运期记录

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the user asks to "review this influencer content" or "check if this post meets brand guidelines"; runs the typed STAR pre-publish gate, scores Trust and Appeal on the deliverable, folds in the creator Suitability read, computes the profile-weighted SQS, checks the disclosure/claim/brand-safety and fraud/fake-engagement vetoes, and writes constructive revision feedback. Not for drafting the brief — use brief-generator; not for partnership terms — use contract-helper. 达人内容审核/发布前质检

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Trace BIRD routing-daemon behavior through the actual C source tree. Use for implementation questions, suspected upstream bugs, parser/keyword origins, filter instructions, protocol state machines, route attributes, birdc commands, stack traces, or BIRD 2 versus BIRD 3 source comparisons. Prefer a local checkout or exact upstream tag/commit and cite concrete files, functions, and revisions. Route config linting to bird-agent and active incidents to bird-troubleshooting.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Prepares mobile releases across Flutter, native Android, native iOS, React Native and Kotlin Multiplatform, including separate Android/iOS artifacts from a shared KMP revision. Covers versions, signing, symbols, store readiness, rollout, release notes and CI/CD. Use for release audits, store submission, build pipelines or rollout planning.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Write operator-facing and public documentation plans for AI-Controlled Party mixer/Soundcraft Ui24R scene arming. Use for runbooks, rehearsal checklists, show-day checklists, EN/PT docs updates, demo scripts, safety wording, and follow-up documentation revisions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when working with Aws Codedeploy — aWS CodeDeploy application and deployment management. Covers applications, deployment groups, deployment history, deployment configurations, instance health, target revisions, and rollback settings. Use when inspecting deployments, debugging failed deployments, reviewing deployment strategies, or auditing deployment group configurations.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。