「research rigor」の検索結果

Produce a rigorous, sector-relative, multi-factor fundamental analysis of a publicly listed company — Indian (NSE/BSE) or US/global. Use when the user asks to analyse, research, evaluate, or value a stock, ticker, or listed company; asks whether a business is fundamentally strong, cheap, or expensive; compares companies or benchmarks one against its sector; or mentions OPM, ROCE, ROE, ROIC, P/E, EV/EBITDA, free cash flow, NIM, GNPA, CASA, promoter holding or pledging. Use it for accounting-quality and forensic questions — "is the profit real", "why is profit rising but cash isn't", auditor qualifications, related-party concerns — which route to the forensic-only mode, and for IPOs and not-yet-listed companies — "should I apply to this IPO", DRHP/RHP or S-1 questions, price band, grey market premium — which route to the IPO mode. Use it even when the request sounds casual ("is Infosys any good?"). Do not use it for personalised investment advice, portfolio allocation, or trading signals.

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。

Manage a stateful, run-directory-based proof project with Codex: continuation across runs, run-local source bookkeeping, manual GPT Pro handoff packages when a local attempt stalls, and an optional DeepSeek second opinion as additional evidence only. Use when the user asks for proof-run orchestration, a GPT Pro handoff, or cross-run proof continuation — use /proof-writer for ordinary proof drafting and /proof-checker for rigorous verification or submission acceptance.

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。

Writes rigorous mathematical proofs for ML/AI theory. Use when asked to prove a theorem, lemma, proposition, or corollary, fill in missing proof steps, formalize a proof sketch, 补全证明, 写证明, 证明某个命题, or determine whether a claimed proof can actually be completed under the stated assumptions.

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。

Manage a stateful, run-directory-based proof project: continuation across runs, run-local source bookkeeping, manual GPT Pro handoff packages when a local attempt stalls, and an optional DeepSeek second opinion as additional evidence only. Use when the user asks for proof-run orchestration, a GPT Pro handoff, or cross-run proof continuation — use /proof-writer for ordinary proof drafting and /proof-checker for rigorous verification or submission acceptance.

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 a question, decision, plan, tradeoff, or claim needs a rigorous verdict and one perspective is not enough. Spawns a panel of 3 to 5 subagent jurors that form independent blind opinions, deliberate anonymously under an anti-anchoring and anti-sycophancy protocol, and return one committed verdict with confidence, preserved dissent, and a concrete next action. Domain-agnostic across engineering, architecture, data, product, hiring, strategy, vendor choice, build-vs-buy, and research design. Trigger phrases include "convene a jury", "have agents debate and decide", "get a panel to decide", "multi-agent decision", "stress-test this and decide", "monte um juri", "tribunal de agentes", "painel para decidir". Do NOT use to only critique without deciding (use the-fool for that), to build a plan or write the solution itself, or for simple factual lookups.

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 "analyze experimental results", "run strict statistical analysis", "compare model performance", "generate scientific figures", "check significance", "do ablation analysis", or mentions interpreting experiment data with rigorous statistics and visualization. It focuses on strict analysis bundles, not Results-section prose.

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 rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.

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。

Evaluate research rigor. Assess methodology, experimental design, statistical validity, biases, confounding, evidence quality (GRADE, Cochrane ROB), for critical analysis of scientific 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。

Precision editing tool that reduces abstract word count through intelligent compression techniques, maintaining scientific rigor while meeting strict journal and conference requirements.

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。

Scrum-inspired paper review, revision, and R&R workflow. Handles docx/tex/md/PDF in English or Chinese. Auto-detects manuscript stage, estimates sprint count, runs multi-lens review (Contribution/Rigor/Writing/Editor), generates prioritized revision backlog, exports MD/DOCX/PDF/HTML reports. Use when asked to review a paper, revise based on reviewer comments, handle R&R, respond to peer review, plan paper revision sprints, or when user types /ps or /papersprint.

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。

Transform research findings into actionable implementation plans with stakes-based rigor, test-first strategy, and granular task decomposition.

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 choosing and justifying the research design for an Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ) manuscript — qualitative (grounded-theory, ethnographic, historical) or quantitative — and setting the rigor bar. Designs the study; it does not run the analysis (see asq-data-analysis).

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。

YC Office Hours — product idea diagnostic before writing code. Two modes: Startup (6 forcing questions with rigorous pushback) and Builder (generative brainstorming). Outputs design doc. Includes landscape research, premise challenge, alternatives generation, visual wireframe sketching, and optional cross-model second opinion.

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。

Review criteria for the nw-diverger-reviewer — validates JTBD rigor, research quality, option diversity, taste application correctness, and recommendation coherence in DIVERGE wave artifacts

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 receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation

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。

Tracked lightweight execution with composable rigor flags: --trivial, --discuss, --research, --full. Covers zero-ceremony inline fixes (typo, spelling fix, small mistake in a single file, ≤3 edits) through contained multi-file changes.

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 whenever reasoning about immunology, host-pathogen interactions, innate immunity, Toll-like receptors (TLRs), or experimental design in molecular biology. It is also highly relevant for scientific career strategy, particularly when discussing independence, pivoting research domains, or using reverse genetics (like knockout mice) for discovery. Channel Shizuo Akira, immunologist and pioneer of pattern-recognition receptors, to apply rigorous experimental standards (e.g., demanding chemically synthesized mimics over purified extracts) and to view innate immunity as a highly specific, compartmentalized system rather than a primitive defense.

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。

Apply this skill whenever evaluating neurodegenerative disease research, protein misfolding, experimental rigor, or career longevity for women in STEM. Use this to channel the thinking of Virginia M.-Y. Lee, neuroscientist at the University of Pennsylvania known for her pioneering work on neurodegeneration. Trigger this skill when discussing Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, ALS, protein aggregation, cell-to-cell transmission of pathology, brain banking, or multidisciplinary scientific collaboration. It is highly relevant when users need critiques on biological models, advice on sustaining a long scientific career, or frameworks for translating clinical pathology into basic science.

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 to apply the rigorous epidemiological reasoning of Julie E. Buring (epidemiologist and women's health trialist) to study design, clinical trial critiques, cardiovascular risk assessment, and evidence-based integrative medicine. Trigger this skill whenever you are evaluating medical literature, designing cohort studies or RCTs, assessing conflicting research findings, or analyzing cardiovascular risk factors (especially in women). Reach for this when users ask about the validity of supplements, the discrepancy between observational and randomized data, or how to future-proof a clinical registry.

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。

Scientific research engine with agentic tree search. Infinite loops until discovery, rigorous tracking, adversarial review, serendipity preserved.

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。

Scientific research in serendipity mode. Infinite loops until discovery, rigorous tracking, adversarial 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。

Systematic methodology for eliciting, representing, and operationalizing expert cognitive skills—pattern recognition, situation assessment, mental simulation—from practitioners without requiring research training. Bridges academic rigor and practical usability.

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。

Um Engenheiro de Pesquisa Acadêmica inabalável. Opera com rigor científico absoluto, crítica objetiva e zero floreios. Focado em correção teórica, verificação formal e implementação otimizada em qualquer tecnologia necessária.

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 methodology for eliciting, representing, and operationalizing expert cognitive skills—pattern recognition, situation assessment, mental simulation—from practitioners without requiring research training. Bridges academic rigor and practical usability.

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。