「aims」の検索結果

Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

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。

Assist with biomedical grant proposal drafting, structure, and revision; use when preparing fundable proposal sections, aligning aims and methods, or improving reviewer-facing clarity.

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。

Matches a user’s biomedical research direction, disease problem, study aim, data modality, and resource constraints to the most relevant recent algorithms and method papers. Always search real recent algorithm literature first, prioritize the last 12 months, expand to 1–3 years only when needed, and add canonical baselines only when necessary. Every formal algorithm recommendation must include the verified primary method paper, plus published downstream papers that actually cite/use the algorithm when such papers are found, with DOI when available. Never fabricate papers, algorithm names, authors, journals, years, DOI, PMID, links, or benchmark claims. If no directly verified algorithm paper is found, say so explicitly.

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。

Designs a structured real-world evidence study using EHR, claims, or registry data, with explicit handling of time zero, eligibility windows, exposure definitions, outcome windows, censoring, confounding control, and target-trial-emulation logic. Use this skill when the user needs study-type design and protocol framing for an observational clinical study based on routine-care data. Do not invent database fields, follow-up completeness, linkage, coding validity, or causal identifiability.

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。

Designs primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints for biomedical and clinical research protocols. Always use this skill when a user needs to translate study aims into operational endpoint definitions with event rules, assessment timing, composite logic, interpretability, and protocol-stage auditability. Focus on endpoint precision, feasibility, clinical meaning, ambiguity reduction, and implementation readiness rather than generic study design advice.

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。

Extracts concrete unmet clinical needs from guidelines, reviews, real-world studies, and clinical-practice evidence. Use this skill when a user wants to turn broad medical research value into specific clinical pain points such as weak early detection, poor risk stratification, treatment-response heterogeneity, monitoring gaps, diagnostic delay, undertreatment, overtreatment, or implementation failure. Always ground unmet-need claims in retrieved evidence and distinguish true care gaps from generic statements of importance.

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。

Assesses whether a medical research topic is worth starting now by separating true novelty from pseudo-novelty, auditing real feasibility under stated resource constraints, and forcing a concrete start / narrow / redesign / stop decision. Always require explicit assumptions and never fabricate references, datasets, resource availability, precedent studies, or publication claims.

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。

Reads a paper figure by figure before re-integrating the full narrative, so the user can identify the core findings quickly and check whether each visual actually supports the authors' main claims. Always separate figure content, figure-linked claim, evidentiary strength, and unsupported interpretation. Never fabricate references, PMIDs, DOIs, figure content, panel labels, result values, or study details that were not actually provided.

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。

Identifies real, evidence-audited, topic-specific research gaps in medical research by first retrieving and verifying literature from trusted sources, then mapping the current evidence landscape, rejecting pseudo-gaps, and converting only medium/high-confidence gaps into study-ready research opportunities. Always require real literature retrieval before formal gap claims. Never fabricate references, metadata, or findings.

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。

Maps whether a biomedical research topic, subtopic, or study angle is truly saturated, superficially crowded, strategically occupied, or still open for differentiated entry. Use this skill when a user wants to know whether a hot medical research direction is already overworked, whether meaningful whitespace remains, whether major groups have already occupied the obvious claims, and whether the timing window is still open. Always distinguish popularity from true saturation, and distinguish cosmetic novelty from meaningful differentiating entry.

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。

Assesses whether study results are trustworthy by auditing design integrity, sample structure, statistical handling, bias control, validation chain, and claim discipline. It identifies where results are robust, fragile, overfit, under-validated, or overclaimed. Always separate reported findings from reliability judgment. Never fabricate references, PMIDs, DOIs, trial identifiers, study features, or validation claims.

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 whether manuscript references are accurately matched to claims, appropriately scoped, and not overextended, misquoted, or second-hand cited.

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。

Evidence requirement enforcement ensuring all claims are backed by logs, test results, or exit codes. Zero = success, non-zero = failure. No guessing allowed.

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 ONLY when the user asks to check, validate, review or audit analysis code for scientific correctness, or when you are the reviewer agent running its checks. Never run it unprompted as part of ordinary analysis work. Covers physics, earth/geo, biology, chemistry, social science and bioprocess/fermentation. Runs a deterministic domain-correctness gate that catches code which runs but is scientifically wrong (unit/dimension mismatch, Euclidean distance on lat/lon without a CRS, 0-based/1-based coordinate and strand errors, impossible SMILES valence, uncorrected multiple comparisons, averaging a categorical code, unconstrained kinetic-parameter fits, kLa computed from raw DO instead of the driving force, arithmetic mean of raw CFU counts, ANOVA/Tukey with no assumption check, a curvature DOE design fit with a first-order model, an ML model fit across process scales with no correction). Surfaces structured findings; never claims the code is correct.

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 whenever you run statistical analysis for the social sciences (regression, hypothesis tests, econometrics) or read Stata (.dta) / SPSS (.sav) data in this workspace. Enforces an execute-don't-interpret boundary (surface estimates, don't volunteer causal claims), checks the analysis against a preregistration plan for HARKing, verifies reproducible seeds, and reproduces .dta/.sav estimates via R. Flags integrity risks; never certifies the analysis is sound.

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。

Comprehensive adversarial audit of a theory, proof, math/econ paper, codebase, or set of claims — decompose into components, fan out independent skeptics that must return CONCRETE defects, adjudicate every finding with a separate judge, fix all confirmed defects, then re-verify. Use when correctness must be bulletproof and single-pass or round-by-round review is too slow and too shallow. Invoke for "audit this rigorously", "find ALL the bugs/gaps", "make this rock solid", "converge faster on correctness".

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。

Keeps a project's to-do list and memory in GitHub issues — files each finding (from a review, an audit, or the user) as its own issue without duplicates, lists the open issues that bear on the current work, and closes an issue with a comment recording what was wrong, what was tried, what worked, and how it was fixed. Use when review findings or a list of problems should become tracked work (a paper's misleading claims, a codebase's bugs, improvements for later), when starting or resuming work and deciding what to do next, or when a fix has landed and its issue should be closed with a record. Needs the GitHub CLI; warns before posting to a public repository.

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。

Research-brief + claim-record discipline for delegated or AI-assisted research work. Use when starting any substantive research task or long autonomous run (write the brief first), and when reporting results that will support a claim in a paper or decision (produce the claim record). Keeps faster execution from being confused with credible 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。

Assemble a submission-ready replication package to the AEA Data and Code Availability Standard (DCAS) / openICPSR / Social Science Reproduction Platform expectations — standard replication README, dataset manifest, computational-requirements capture, a Table/Figure → script:line map, and a confidential-data deposit plan. Use when user says "build the replication package", "prepare the openICPSR deposit", "make the AEA data and code package", "DCAS compliance", "assemble the deposit for the journal", or after a paper is accepted and the journal's data editor needs the package. NOT a numeric verifier — it calls /audit-reproducibility to confirm claims reproduce before packaging.

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。

Enforce the replication-protocol.md rule by cross-checking numeric claims in a manuscript against the actual R / Stata / Python outputs. Report PASS/FAIL per claim against tolerance thresholds. Use before submission and before releasing a replication package.

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 DevKit · Enforce evidence-based completion claims — require fresh command output before reporting success. Use when completing any task, fixing a bug, finishing a phase, running tests, building, deploying, or making any "it works" claim.

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。

Extract factual claims from PR copy, verify each claim independently, attach concrete citations, and warn when certainty is low. Runs each claim through proven newsroom verification methods (lateral reading, source-tier climbing, provenance pillars, triangulation, calibrated rating) and puts the burden of proof on the speaker. Use before a pitch, press release, reactive comment, DM, or other journalist-facing draft is trusted or sent.

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。

Diagnoses and safely reclaims macOS disk space: caches, logs, app remnants, large/duplicate files, Docker/OrbStack, Chromium code-sign clones, developer caches. Use when a Mac is low on storage, shows “Caching needs more space”, or before deleting anything to avoid data loss. Not for Windows/Linux or permission issues (use macos-permissions).

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 a product listing for an overseas marketplace or store, localised for the buyer rather than translated from Chinese: title, bullet points, description, search terms and the compliance claims that must or must not appear. Use when asked 帮我写亚马逊 listing, 跨境电商标题, write a product listing for Amazon, TikTok Shop, Shopee, Lazada, Etsy or Shopify, or localise my listing for the US, UK, Germany or Japan. Produces the listing in the target language within the platform's field limits, a keyword map, a compliance check of every claim, and a list of images the listing needs.

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。