「conditions」の検索結果

Identify differentially accessible chromatin regions across conditions using DiffBind, csaw, DESeq2, or edgeR. Use when comparing ATAC-seq accessibility between treatment groups, choosing between consensus-peak vs sliding-window approaches, picking the correct normalization (full library vs reads-in-peaks), correcting batch with SVA/RUVseq, or interpreting log2FC and FDR thresholds in a chromatin context.

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。

Analyze TF motif accessibility variability across samples or single cells using chromVAR. Use when identifying TF motifs whose accessibility correlates with conditions, computing per-sample motif z-scores after matched background correction, comparing to ArchR / Signac equivalents, or distinguishing motif-accessibility signal from per-site footprinting.

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。

Map nucleosome center positions, occupancy, and fuzziness from ATAC-seq fragment-size patterns using NucleoATAC, ATACseqQC, DANPOS3, or scprinter. Use when characterizing nucleosome organization at promoters and enhancers, calling +1/-1 nucleosomes flanking NFRs, generating V-plots for chromatin structure visualization, or comparing nucleosome positioning between conditions.

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。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "create an agent", "add an agent", "write a subagent", "agent frontmatter", "when to use description", "agent examples", "agent tools", "agent colors", "autonomous agent", or needs guidance on agent structure, system prompts, triggering conditions, or agent development best practices for Claude Code plugins.

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。

This skill determines whether inpatient diabetic patients meet high-risk criteria for CGM initiation using Table 3 factors such as age ≥65 years, BMI ≤27 kg/m², type 1 diabetes, insulin regimen, and specific clinical conditions. It is triggered by clinician questions like "Should I assess this inpatient for CGM initiation based on hypoglycemia risk?" or "Is this patient a candidate for inpatient CGM?"

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。

Recommends steroidogenesis inhibitors as second-line treatment after transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) in Cushing's disease, as primary therapy for occult or metastatic ectopic ACTH syndrome (EAS), and as adjunctive cortisol reduction in adrenocortical carcinoma. Use when evaluating CS patients post‑TSS, with occult/metastatic EAS, or ACC; triggers include “persistent hypercortisolism after TSS,” “occult EAS,” and “adjunctive for ACC.”

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。

Analyze market conditions, geographic opportunities, pricing, consumer behavior, and product validation across Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram, Booking.com, and TripAdvisor.

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。

Find overly complex code: files over 300 lines, functions over 50 lines, deeply nested conditions (4+ levels), and magic numbers. Use for code quality reviews, pre-release checks, or when asked to assess code maintainability.

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。

Expert-level optimization knowledge. Use when working with linear programming, convex optimization, nonlinear programming, integer programming, dynamic programming, gradient methods, duality theory, or optimization algorithms. Also use when the user mentions 'linear programming', 'simplex method', 'convex optimization', 'Lagrangian', 'KKT conditions', 'gradient descent', 'Newton method', 'integer programming', 'dynamic programming', 'duality', 'Bellman equation', or 'branch and bound'.

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。

Systematic testing methodology for exhaustive branch coverage, edge case identification, and production bug prevention. Use when PR review reveals incomplete test coverage, when tests pass but users report bugs, when code changes break existing features, when verifying all branches and edge cases before merge, when analyzing "it works on my machine" issues, when planning test strategy for new features, or when debugging flaky tests and race conditions.

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。

Analyze, design, write, revise, translate, and review empirical or technical research papers through an evidence-bounded dialectical workflow. Use when Codex must develop a research question, integrate reference papers with a user's ideas, build phenomenon-mechanism-conditions reasoning, design methods or experiments, restructure or edit a manuscript, translate Chinese academic text into restrained English, answer reviewers, or run multi-round peer-review convergence without fabricating 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。

GStack plan-tune method for calibrating how many questions to ask, autonomy level, stop conditions, and decision style for a workstream or user preference.

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。

GStack guard method for strengthening scope boundaries, forbidden actions, stop conditions, and validation gates for an agent or workstream.

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。

Analyze market conditions, geographic opportunities, pricing, consumer behavior, and product validation across Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram, Booking.com, and TripAdvisor.

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。

Runs a bounded spec-build-review development loop with explicit scope, stop conditions, and human approval gates for risky or ambiguous work.

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。

Conduct a defensible cybersecurity risk assessment using the NIST SP 800-30 Rev 1 methodology: prepare scope and a risk model, identify threat sources and threat events, identify vulnerabilities and predisposing conditions, determine likelihood and impact, compute risk, and communicate results as a prioritized risk register. Use when an organization needs an actual risk *assessment* (not a maturity score), when a control framework (CSF, ISO 27001, RMF, SOC 2, PCI) requires a documented risk analysis as input, when leadership asks "what are our top risks and how bad are they", when assessing risk for a new system or major change, or when building a risk register from scratch. This is the methodology that feeds framework selection, ATO packages, and treatment decisions. Keywords: risk assessment, NIST 800-30, threat modeling, likelihood and impact, risk register, risk analysis, threat sources, vulnerabilities, risk determination, qualitative risk, risk matrix, residual risk, risk treatment.

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。

This skill should be used when creating UAT (User Acceptance Testing) test cases in Excel format for Salesforce CRM projects. It generates standardized test case documents with summary sheets and detailed test case lists, following a specific format structure with test case ID, priority, category, scenario, preconditions, test steps, expected results, and acceptance criteria.

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。

Professional contract review skill for business agreements including NDAs, MSAs, SLAs, SOWs, and software license agreements. Provides systematic clause-by-clause analysis, risk assessment with quantified scoring, red flag detection, and negotiation guidance. Use this skill when reviewing vendor contracts, partnership agreements, service agreements, or any business contract requiring risk evaluation and negotiation preparation. Triggers include "review this contract", "analyze this NDA", "check this agreement for risks", "prepare for contract negotiation", or when evaluating terms and conditions.

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 800-160 Vol 1 (Engineering Trustworthy Secure Systems) and Vol 2 (Developing Cyber-Resilient Systems). Use for systems security engineering (SSE): the three SSE framework contexts (problem/solution/trustworthiness), the 30+ design principles for trustworthy secure design, trustworthiness and assurance/assurance cases, security across the ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 life-cycle process groups, and the Vol 2 cyber-resiliency engineering framework — 4 goals (anticipate/withstand/recover/adapt), objectives, 14 techniques, implementation approaches, and design principles for the APT/adverse-conditions threat model. Bridges systems engineering and the NIST security cluster (CSF/SSDF/RMF). Does not reproduce ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 process text, nor cover SP 800-53 control catalogs in depth.

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。

Answers an employee's or manager's HR policy question strictly from the policy documents the user supplies or the agent can reach as knowledge: a DRAFT answer that quotes the governing clause with its document, version and clause reference, lists the conditions and exceptions the text states, returns UNKNOWN where the documents are silent and names the role to ask. Never invents a rule, fills a gap from general practice or decides an individual's case. Use when the user asks to check a policy, for example "what does the policy say about", "am I entitled to", "how many days of leave do I get", "what is the process for requesting", "does the handbook allow" or "which clause covers". Do not use for comparing two policy versions or briefing a change, use policy-change-briefing 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。

Checks an extracted PFD register as a process model and returns findings and unknowns only: connectivity closure, stream numbering, presence of design conditions, equipment duty text, phase and service labels, package and off-sheet scope, boundaries, operating cases, and agreement between the drawing and attached process documents, then holds at gate G2. Creates no design values. Use when the user asks to "check the process model", "verify connectivity" or "is the PFD ready for enrichment" after gate G1 and before enrichment. Do not use for extraction from the drawing, use pfd-intake-and-extraction instead; do not use to propose lines or instruments, use piping-enrichment. 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。

Reviews a proposal, business case, deck or plan in character as an Investor archetype and returns a DRAFT review in the chat with a verdict whose conditions read as terms, findings that cite the exact passage, capital-allocation risks, what would change the verdict and five interrogation questions. Use when the user asks to "run an investor review", "what would an investor say about this", "pressure-test the capital case" or "prepare me for the investment committee". Do not use for internal budget, cost or finance-function review, use cfo-reviewer instead; for revenue forecast and pipeline, use cro-reviewer. 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。

Analyze market conditions, geographic opportunities, pricing, consumer behavior, and product validation across Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram, Booking.com, and TripAdvisor.

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。

Runs a bounded spec-build-review development loop with explicit scope, stop conditions, and human approval gates for risky or ambiguous work.

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。