「assumption」の検索結果

Controls error rates across thousands of simultaneous tests in genomics discovery using false-discovery-rate methods (Benjamini-Hochberg 1995; Benjamini-Yekutieli 2001 for arbitrary dependence; Storey q-value with pi0 estimation; local FDR; independent filtering Bourgon 2010; covariate-weighted FDR via IHW Ignatiadis 2016), plus family-wise error control (Bonferroni, Holm) and the GWAS genome-wide threshold. Covers the FDR-versus-FWER choice as the discovery-versus-confirmatory distinction, the dependence assumptions behind BH (PRDS) versus BY, pi0 estimation, the independent-filtering and false-coverage-rate traps, and reproducibility ranking via IDR (Li 2011). Use when correcting p-values from genome-wide tests, choosing between BH/BY/q-value/Bonferroni, setting an FDR threshold, applying IHW or independent filtering, or interpreting q-values. For confirmatory trials with few pre-specified endpoints (closed testing, graphical/gatekeeping), see clinical-biostatistics/multiplicity-graphical.

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。

Normalizes and transforms RNA-seq count matrices for DE, visualization, clustering, and ML. Covers between-sample (TMM, TMMwsp, RLE/median-of-ratios, upper quartile), within-sample (TPM, FPKM/RPKM), variance-stabilizing (VST, rlog, log-CPM), GC-content correction (cqn, EDASeq), and single-cell (scran deconvolution, scanpy normalize_total). Encodes the composition-bias rationale, the "most genes not DE" assumption and its catastrophic failure modes (MYC amplification, apoptosis, viral host shutoff, prokaryotic stress), the "lengthScaledTPM is not TPM" naming trap, the "TPM is not for DE" rule, the blind=TRUE vs FALSE decision, ERCC spike-in normalization (SBN), and the single-cell zero-inflation breakdown of TMM/RLE. Use when choosing or applying normalization, debugging shifted-MA-plot diagnostics, handling zero-heavy single-cell data, or correcting GC bias.

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。

Estimates SNP heritability and partitions it across functional annotations, cell types, and loci from GWAS summary statistics or individual-level genotypes. Implements LDSC, stratified LDSC with the baseline-LD model, Finucane 2018 cell-type prioritization, LDAK SumHer, HDL, HESS local heritability, BOLT-REML, GCTA-GREML, graphREML, and Popcorn cross-population genetic correlation. Use when computing total h2_SNP from summary stats, partitioning heritability across functional categories, prioritizing trait-relevant tissues or cell types from ENCODE/Roadmap chromatin marks, reconciling LDSC vs LDAK enrichment estimates, computing local heritability with HESS, estimating genetic correlation between traits, or producing publication-grade enrichment with calibrated sensitivity to model 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。

Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success 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。

Review local git changes before opening a PR or merging. First review all local tracked and untracked files; if none exist, review the current branch against a requested base branch or the Git Town parent branch. Use zero to three review subagents only when risk, diff size, language specificity, or uncertainty justifies the token cost, then report high-confidence bugs, regressions, risky assumptions, and missing tests. Use when the user asks for code review, local review, branch sanity check, pre-PR review, or review of work-in-progress 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。

Finalize an implemented rolling-wave slice for user review. Use when the user wants Codex to review the current branch state against a ready-for-review or in-review slice contract, confirm and fix required findings, repeat review and verification until no required findings remain, ask before accepting findings that materially change project shape or contradict project assumptions, record review state, and leave the clean slice in review for complete-slice.

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。

Reconstruct a free-form prompt into actionable AC + assumptions + confidence band before the engine plans — '/work "…"', 'baue X', 'ist der Prompt klar genug für die Engine?'.

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 to audit a past architectural decision — did the chosen option hold up, what assumptions drifted, should the ADR be superseded? Backward review only; does not lock new choices.

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。

Examine a plan, decision, belief, or problem through question rounds that explore assumptions, alternatives, and consequences before acting.

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。

Foundational ethics, authority hierarchy, and structural principles for the Predicate agent. Always-on law (composable system-prompt core): Truth>Harmony, Evidence>Authority, Halt>Assumption, Outcomes>Process — four ordered principles that govern every walk. Reference (by-moment): conflict resolution, ethics adjudication, novel situations, precedence walkthrough, entropy diagnostics, principled resistance. Trigger (reference depth): resolving rule conflicts, ethics calls, novel situations. Prompt contains: constitution, principles, precedence, truth over harmony, outcomes over process, evidence over authority, principled resistance.

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。

First-principles strategy — strip away conventional assumptions and find the theoretical maximum for your business. Three modes. Diagnostic mode runs a full session (45+ min) to define your theoretical maximum, map the gap honestly, classify constraints, invert for failure modes, set strategic intent, and work backwards to your first intervention. Review mode (15-20 min) checks whether your theoretical maximum has shifted, whether the gap has changed, and whether you're still climbing the right peak. Alert mode defines constraint-shift, peak-shift, and local-peak triggers that tell you when to reassess. Use when someone is stuck optimising incrementally, when conventional wisdom is driving strategy, when a new technology or regulation changes what's physically possible, or when you suspect the business is climbing a local peak. Integrates with company-context.md. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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。

Stress-test plans before committing by imagining they've already failed. Three modes. Diagnostic mode runs a full pre-mortem session — vivid failure scene-setting, six failure categories, the monkey test, and concrete plan adjustments. Review mode checks previous findings monthly for changed probabilities and new failure modes. Alert Triggers mode defines and monitors early warning signals across four trigger categories. Use before any major commitment — strategy, investment, product launch, partnership — or regularly to keep assumptions honest. The planning fallacy is real. The spreadsheet looked great so everyone stopped thinking. This is the antidote. Based on practice by Eterdis (eterdis.com).

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 work is ambiguous or has multiple viable paths; compares options, assumptions, evidence, tradeoffs, and the best next action.

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 starts a non-trivial coding/building task in Claude Code (e.g. "帮我做个 X", "help me build Y", "add feature Z", "搭一个 Z"). Layers an AI-native pedagogical coat over normal coding work — surfaces implicit assumptions in user intent, annotates non-trivial design decisions inline with brief concept-scaffolding for terms the user may not know, and replaces "should I run it?" handoffs with rigorous AI self-verification plus a clean list of what only the user can verify. Skip for pure Q&A, single-line edits, read-only investigation, or refactoring along an existing pattern.

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。

Clarify ambiguous or conflicting requests by researching first, then asking only judgment calls. Use when prompts say "grill me", ask hard questions, request relentless interrogation, pressure-test assumptions, clarify scope/requirements, define success criteria, or request system-design/optimization decisions before implementation; stop before 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。

Conduct a Marty-Cagan-style opportunity assessment interview and produce a ~2-page Opportunity Brief in Confluence. Covers business objective, customer, problem, success metric, current alternatives, assumptions/risks, and what we don't know yet. Triggers on "opportunity brief", "opportunity assessment", "discovery brief", "who is this for", "why are we building this", "validate this idea", "product discovery", or any request to frame a feature before implementation. One question at a time. Records accepted research gaps as structured Confluence Decision pages with bidirectional links.

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。

Post-launch review of a shipped PRD against the brief's success metrics. Did we move the metric? What did the data actually show? Which assumptions held, which broke? Which accepted-gap decisions resolved (confirmed vs. invalidated)? What would we do differently? Triggers on "outcome review", "did it work", "post-launch review", "did we move the metric", "retro the feature", "was it worth it". Produces a Confluence outcome-review page and updates the brief + linked decisions.

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。

XP-style plan review that identifies gaps, hidden assumptions, and critical misses. Triggers on 'review the plan', 'check the plan', 'audit the plan'. Reviews plans for YAGNI violations, missing feedback loops, and over-engineering.

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。

Crystallize shared understanding into a reviewable spec, or update an existing one. Use when the problem needs a written specification, when assumptions or decisions have changed, or when the user says 'write a spec'.

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。

Econometrics skill for OLS regression and linear models. Activates when the user asks about: "run OLS", "linear regression", "ordinary least squares", "interpret regression results", "heteroskedasticity", "multicollinearity", "regression assumptions", "robust standard errors", "GLS", "WLS", "fit a regression model", "check regression diagnostics", "OLS假设", "最小二乘法", "线性回归", "回归系数", "残差检验", "异方差", "多重共线性", "普通最小二乘", "稳健标准误", "回归诊断"

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 results analysis for empirical research: generate publication-quality descriptive statistics and balance tables, interpret regression coefficients with economic magnitude and effect sizes, assess identification assumption diagnostics, and produce structured results memos. Use when asked to create summary statistics, Table 1, balance tests, interpret results, assess economic significance, or write results narratives.

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。

Econometrics skill for Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD). Activates when the user asks about: "regression discontinuity", "RDD", "RD design", "sharp RDD", "fuzzy RDD", "running variable", "forcing variable", "cutoff", "bandwidth selection", "local linear regression", "McCrary test", "density test", "RDROBUST", "continuity assumption", "donut hole RDD", "geographic RDD", "断点回归", "回归不连续", "运行变量", "截断值", "带宽选择", "精确断点", "模糊断点", "密度检验", "局部线性回归"

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 NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods (NIST HB 151) — the practical statistics reference for engineering, metrology, and quality. Use for: exploratory data analysis and the four univariate assumptions (4-plot); measurement process characterization including bias/precision, calibration designs, gauge R&R, and ISO/GUM uncertainty budgets; production process characterization (stability vs. capability); process modeling and regression (LS/WLS/NLS/LOESS); design of experiments (screening, fractional/factorial, response-surface, Taguchi); statistical process control (Shewhart/CUSUM/EWMA charts, capability indices, acceptance sampling); product/process comparisons (hypothesis tests and confidence intervals for 1/2/3+ groups, ANOVA, multiple comparisons); and reliability (lifetime & repair-rate models, accelerated testing, reliability growth). Scope limits: this is applied frequentist statistics for measurement and quality — it does NOT reproduce the per-distribution formula galleries, worked case studies, datasets, plot images, or Dataplot/R code of the original web Handbook (those are described, not copied); it is thin on modern machine learning, Bayesian methods beyond conjugate reliability priors, time-series/forecasting, and Bayesian experimental design.

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 Cost Estimating Handbook (CEH) v4.0. Use for NASA's 12-step, three-part cost estimating process (Project Definition, Cost Methodology, Cost Estimate); the WBS, CADRe, and ONCE data backbone; estimating methodologies (analogy, parametric/CER, engineering build-up, EVM, Delphi); ground rules and assumptions, data normalization and inflation (BY/CY/RY); the point-estimate-to-S-curve cost-risk chain and Unallocated Future Expense (UFE) reserves; Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level (JCL) analysis via probabilistic cost-loaded schedules; decision-support analyses (sensitivity, trade studies, make/lease-vs-buy, affordability, CAIV); and economic analysis (discounting, NPV, OMB Circular A-94). The cost-estimating complement to NASA's SE and risk packs. Does NOT reproduce the handbook's tool-specific procedures, worked examples, or appendix-depth methods (it names the appendices), nor cover full DoD/GAO cost guides, schedule construction, or formal risk management beyond the cost interface.

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。