「evaluation」の検索結果

Use when rigging a character, creature or prop in Maya: "rig this character", placing or orienting joints, Orient Joint doing nothing, IK/FK switch and matching, pole vector flips or elbow drift, space switching, foot roll, spline IK spine, offsetParentMatrix, blendMatrix or matrix rigging, controls and lockdown for animators, Quick Rig, HumanIK, AdvancedSkeleton or mGear, a game skeleton for Unreal or Unity, or a slow rig (parallel evaluation, profiling, GPU Override not kicking in).

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。

Query journal indexing/inclusion status on CNKI - check which databases include a journal (北大核心, CSSCI, CSCD, SCI, EI, etc.), get impact factors and evaluation data. Use when user asks about a journal's level, indexing, or ranking.

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 for Amazon e-commerce research, market validation, competitor analysis, traffic diagnosis, keyword strategy, advertising review, launch evaluation, and growth optimization using the Sif MCP server and Sif's real marketplace, traffic, keyword, sales, and ad data. Trigger when users mention Sif, Sif MCP, ASIN research, Amazon product opportunity research, keyword opportunity, competitor teardown, traffic drop/root-cause diagnosis, advertising structure review, or whether a product/market is worth entering, launching, scaling, optimizing, or abandoning.

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 an AI workflow against representative cases and its permitted actions. Use for model, retrieval or agent evaluation; tests do not grant release authority.

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。

A platform decision framework for experimentation. When to use Statsig vs PostHog vs GrowthBook vs Optimizely vs Amplitude vs Eppo vs Kameleoon. How to migrate between them. How to coordinate when multi-platform is genuinely warranted. The decisions that compound for years and the ones you can defer. Triggers on which experimentation platform, choose Statsig vs PostHog, evaluate experimentation tools, switch experimentation platform, migrate from Optimizely, consolidate experimentation tools, multi-platform experimentation, experimentation platform decision, ab test platform selection, feature flag platform vs experiment platform, warehouse-native experiments, vendor lock-in experimentation. Also triggers when a team is asking about cost, governance, or migration cost across experimentation tools, or when an evaluation is starting.

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 scientific hypothesis formulation and evaluation

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, refactors, and evaluates prompts for LLMs generating optimized templates, structured output schemas, evaluation rubrics, and test suites.

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 production-grade RAG systems with document chunking, embedding generation, vector store configuration, hybrid search pipelines, reranking, and retrieval quality evaluation.

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。

Generates code that transforms datasets between ML schemas for model training or evaluation. Use when the user says "transform", "convert", "reformat", "change the format", or when a dataset's schema needs to change to match the target format — always use this skill for format changes rather than writing inline transformation code. Supports OpenAI chat, SageMaker SFT/DPO/RLVR/RLAIF, HuggingFace preference, Bedrock Nova, VERL, and custom JSONL formats from local files or S3.

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。

Validates the user's environment for SageMaker AI operations — checks SDK version, AWS region, and execution role. Use when the user says "set up", "getting started", "check my environment", "configure SDK", or as the first step in any plan involving SageMaker/Bedrock training, evaluation, or deployment.

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。

EU MDR 2017/745 compliance specialist for medical device classification, technical documentation, clinical evidence, and post-market surveillance. Use for Annex VIII classification, GSPR, clinical evaluation, EUDAMED, and UDI.

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。

Medical device risk management specialist implementing ISO 14971 throughout product lifecycle. Provides risk analysis, risk evaluation, risk control, and post-production information 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。

GDPR Art. 35 Data Protection Impact Assessment with threshold checking, risk registers, and EDPB criteria scoring. Use for DPIA evaluations.

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 and compare technology stacks with TCO analysis, security assessment, and ecosystem health scoring. Use when comparing frameworks, calculating total cost of ownership, assessing migration paths, or analyzing ecosystem viability.

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 RAG pipelines: chunking, retrieval evaluation, and architecture. Use when building a RAG system, selecting a chunking strategy, choosing a vector database, optimizing retrieval quality, or evaluating with RAGAS metrics.

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。

Test and evaluation harness for AI agents — scenario suites, deterministic replay, regression diffing, cost and latency budgets. Use when agent quality is vibe-checked, before shipping a prompt or model change, or when evals drift.

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。

Multi-agent DAG orchestration for workflows where AI agents collaborate via dependency graphs, covering agent spawning, output merging, and quality evaluation. Use when a task needs multiple specialized agents or to parallelize AI 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。

Designs multi-agent system architectures with orchestration patterns, tool schemas, and performance evaluation. Use when building AI agent systems, designing agent workflows, creating tool schemas, or evaluating agent performance.

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。

Free tool marketing strategy covering idea evaluation, tool design, lead capture architecture, SEO landing pages, launch playbook, and ROI measurement for calculators, generators, checkers, graders, and interactive tools.

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 technology stack evaluation and comparison tool with TCO analysis, security assessment, and intelligent recommendations for engineering teams

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 wants to test their LLM/agent application for safety and security vulnerabilities — jailbreaks, prompt injection, PII extraction, harmful content generation, or evaluator gaming. Also use when the user mentions security testing, adversarial testing, red teaming, safety evaluation, ASR (Attack Success Rate), or "is my app safe to deploy." Outputs ASR paired with over-refusal rate and an audit document.

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 has a RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) system and wants to evaluate its quality — separating retrieval issues from generation issues. Also use when the user mentions RAG evaluation, faithfulness checking, hallucination detection in RAG, retrieval quality, chunking optimization, or "is my RAG pipeline working." Outputs a diagnostic matrix that pinpoints whether problems are in retrieval or generation.

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。

Risk-based vendor assessment framework for IT service providers, technology vendors, and third-party partners under DORA, NIS2, GDPR. Provides three-phase process (Initial Screening / Detailed Assessment / Final Evaluation), six-dimension risk scoring (Financial/Operational/Compliance/Security/Reputational/Strategic) with weighted matrices, full DORA Art. 28-30 contractual checklist, NIS2 Art. 21(2) security measures enumeration, GDPR Art. 28 documentation checks, red flags per dimension, trigger-based review criteria, and document templates. Use when: (1) Evaluating new vendors or technology providers, (2) Conducting critical ICT third-party due diligence under DORA, (3) Performing supply chain security assessment under NIS2, (4) Creating vendor onboarding documentation, (5) Establishing ongoing vendor monitoring, (6) Assessing concentration risk, or (7) Generating executive vendor risk reports.

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。

Panel structure design, firm selection criteria, right-sourcing analysis, and coverage gap assessment for in-house legal teams. Build panel frameworks from scratch or formalise existing informal arrangements. Define weighted selection criteria for firm evaluation. Run right-sourcing analysis (ABC tiering) to identify work sent to expensive providers that doesn't require that level of resource. Assess existing panels for practice area, geographic, and capability gaps. Trigger on: 'design our panel', 'how many firms do we need', 'panel structure', 'firm selection criteria', 'which firms should we use', 'right-sourcing', 'are we sending work to the right firms', 'panel gaps', 'too many firms', 'consolidate our panel', 'we need a firm for', 'preferred provider', 'panel tiers', 'do we need BigLaw for this', 'convergence', 'D&I panel targets', 'how do we choose firms'.

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。