「analysis」の検索結果

Phase 3-1: 価値記述の作成（Phase 3-1）

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。

価値分析モデルを作る時の観点を説明する

Use when evaluating, designing, drafting, revising, stress-testing, or preparing academic articles, empirical research reports, literature reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, journal submissions, reviewer responses, research methods, sampling, measurement, analysis, publication readiness, or citation/source audits.

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 performing cybersecurity operations - offensive or defensive - including threat detection and hunting, SOC operations, incident response, digital forensics and DFIR, malware analysis and reverse engineering, threat intelligence, cloud/container/network/application/API security, identity-access and zero-trust, OT/ICS and endpoint security, vulnerability and supply-chain management, DevSecOps, cryptography, AI security, compliance and governance, and red-team or penetration testing under signed rules of engagement; routes to one of 800+ technique playbooks mapped to MITRE ATT&CK, D3FEND, and NIST CSF.

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。

Package license analysis — detect copyleft conflicts against a permissive policy, surface AGPL / SSPL / GPL contaminants, output SPDX SBOM with per-package license findings. Use when auditing a release for license compliance, vetting a new dependency's license, building an OSS-attribution document, or producing a customer-facing license disclosure.

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。

Dockerfile / Containerfile / compose analysis plus optional Trivy / Grype / Syft composition when those binaries are present. Use when reviewing a Dockerfile PR, gating `docker build`, building an image SBOM, evaluating base-image risk, or auditing a registry image for CVEs.

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。

Diagnostic Playwright workflows for flaky or failing tests, including trace analysis, UI mode, and state isolation.

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 pi (coding-agent) session JSONL and ego-benchmark-harness run artifacts to explain slow or failed individual tasks, compare execution-path differences between agents or browser tools, and count tool calls and error types. Use this skill whenever users ask to analyze a pi session, explain why a task was slow or failed, compare two runs, investigate an error, locate the session corresponding to tasks.jsonl, inspect an agent execution path, count tool calls, analyze a run ID, or perform any forensic or retrospective analysis of JSONL under ~/.pi/agent/sessions/ or agent-home/.pi/agent/sessions/.

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。

Compare standardized metrics across multiple ego-benchmark-harness runs by recalculating them from tasks.jsonl and session JSONL, never from HTML reports. Covers overall aggregates (success rate/average score), Odysseys per-rubric pass rates, duration distributions (avg/p50/p90/max), turns/tools/cost, error and exception counts, per-task success matrices, helper distributions, and the share of DOM operations. Use whenever users ask to compare data or metrics across runs, calculate aggregate/Odysseys/duration/turn/error/helper metrics, inspect differences among runs, or compare multiple rwb/real-world-bench runs. Use pi-session-analyzer instead for deep forensic analysis of why an individual task was slow or failed.

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 a class or module for code smells and produce a prioritized refactoring plan. Use when the user asks for code smell analysis, says `/smells`, or runs `/refactor:smells`.

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。

Iterative deep planning with critiques and alternatives. Use when facing complex design decisions, cross-platform changes, native module modifications, or API changes requiring thorough 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。

Load when diagnosing a bug, exception, regression, wrong result, failing flow, or unknown root cause in repository code using callers/callees, execution flows, recent changes, and impact analysis; not for implementing a known fix without investigation.

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。

Load for behavior-preserving rename, move, decomposition, dead-code removal, dependency cleanup, record/class conversion, or immutable contract migration that needs caller, flow, test, and impact analysis; not for feature work or one-line cleanup.

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。

Load when EF Core reads are slow, emit N+1 or excessive SQL, over-fetch, track too many entities, cause high DB load, or need projection/split-query/compiled-query analysis; not for general migrations, DbContext setup, or repository conventions.

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。

End-to-end data pipeline for empirical research: fetch economic data from APIs (FRED, World Bank, IMF, BLS, OECD, Yahoo Finance), clean and transform raw data, construct strategy-specific variables, and validate panel structure. Use when asked to fetch data, download data, clean data, merge datasets, prepare analysis-ready data.

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 time series analysis. Activates when the user asks about: "time series", "stationarity", "unit root test", "ADF test", "KPSS test", "ARIMA", "ARMA", "autocorrelation", "ACF", "PACF", "VAR model", "VECM", "Granger causality", "cointegration", "impulse response function", "forecast", "seasonal decomposition", "ARCH", "GARCH", "时间序列", "平稳性检验", "单位根", "自回归", "格兰杰因果", "协整", "脉冲响应", "预测", "向量自回归"

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。

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 SD-22 DMSMS Guidebook (DSPO, FY24 working draft). Use for managing Diminished Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) and obsolescence across a long-lived system's life cycle: the five-step process (Prepare, Identify, Assess, Analyze, Implement) plus the Strategize overlay; standing up a DMSMS Management Team (DMT) and Management Plan (DMP); risk-based monitoring and surveillance (the risk cube, predictive tools, vendor surveys, GIDEP/DLA PDNs, critical-materials analysis); health assessments and resolution timing; costing and selecting resolutions (life-of-need buys, substitutes, redesign, technology refreshment) by AoA/BCA; and budgeting/executing resolutions through modification funding and the ECP process. Defense-sustainment / DoD-acquisition framing throughout. Does NOT teach general systems engineering, parts-management standards, or contracting law in depth, and does not reproduce DoD policy text or the source's tables and figures.

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 MIL-HDBK-338B (Electronic Reliability Design Handbook). Use for electronic reliability engineering: R/M/A theory, reliability specification/allocation/prediction, parts management and derating, reliable circuit and fault-tolerant design, environmental and human performance reliability, FMEA/FMECA/FTA/sneak circuit analysis, design reviews and testability, FRACAS, reliability demonstration and growth testing, and systems-level R&M parameters. Covers selected Part 2 design-guidance topics only; skips large annex/part-stress tables. Guidance handbook — not a contractual requirement text. Does not replace MIL-HDBK-217 prediction libraries, service-specific reliability regs, or safety standards (see mil-std-882).

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 FAA AMS Lifecycle V&V Guidelines (verification and validation), Version 3.0, dated April 2017. Use for applying verification and validation across the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS) lifecycle: the verify-vs-validate distinction (built right vs. right thing), the work-product/component/product tiers, the nine V&V planning elements, the four method catalogs (Appendix C), decision-point-gated V&V (SASP, CRD, Investment Analysis, Solution Implementation, In-Service Management), the Appendix B document checklists (PRD/APB/ISPD/PMP), and the DT/OT/IOA test triad. Scope limits: this is an FAA acquisition-V&V doctrine, NOT a general SE process model, requirements-engineering manual, or test-design textbook. It borrows its core V&V definitions from CMMI v1.2 (SEI, paraphrased) and presumes the surrounding AMS lifecycle (see the FAA SEM pack); its phase tables are policy snapshots as of April 2017 and it is thin on detailed test methods, tool specifics, and anything outside FAA acquisition governance.

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 Systems Engineering Handbook (NASA/SP-2016-6105 Rev 2). Use for NASA's systems-engineering process model — the SE Engine and 17 common technical processes, the program/project life cycle (Pre-Phase A through F), Key Decision Points and technical reviews (MCR/SRR/PDR/CDR/…), stakeholder expectations, technical requirements, design solution, product verification and validation, and crosscutting technical management (planning, risk, configuration, interfaces, data, assessment, decision analysis). Strong for aerospace/spaceflight project SE and lifecycle gating; NASA-specific terminology (KDPs, NPR 7123.1).

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 FAA Human Factors Design Standard (HF-STD-001B, 2016) — the FAA's consolidated human-factors / human-systems-integration design criteria for systems it manages, operates, or maintains. Use for requirement-level design rules on: general human-factors design principles; automation and function allocation; designing equipment for maintenance; displays, controls, and visual indicators; alarms, audio, and voice communications; the computer-human interface (information presentation, coding, interaction styles, windows, dialogue); keyboards, input devices, and workstation/workplace ergonomics; system security, personnel safety, environment, anthropometry, and user documentation; plus intended-use and tailoring guidance. It is a quantified, source-attributed synthesis (heavily citing MIL-STD-1472G, MIL-HDBK-759C, DOD-HFDG-ATCCS, NUREG-0700, NASA-STD-3000, ANSI, OSHA, ISO 9241). Complements nasa-hsi as a parallel HSI tradition from the civil-aviation domain. Scope limits: it is design criteria, NOT an HSI lifecycle/process model (use nasa-hsi, nasa-npr-7123, or dau-se-guidebook for process); it does NOT reproduce the third-party standards it cites; it is FAA-acquisition-oriented (ATC, towers, TRACONs, airway facilities), not a general consumer-UX guide; and it is thin on modern touchscreen/mobile, web, and AI-driven interface patterns and on quantitative human-reliability 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。

Knowledge base from FAA-HDBK-006D (2020), the FAA's System Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) Handbook for National Airspace System (NAS) hardware and software. Use for RMA figures of merit (MTBF, MTBO, MTTR, the availability variants), the bathtub curve and probability distributions, the four-stage RMA lifecycle mapped to the FAA Acquisition Management System (AMS), the six-task RMA technical-management/acquisition process, service-thread criticality and the NAS-RD severity-to-target table, the RMA analysis toolbox (RBD, FMEA/FMECA, FTA, Ishikawa, Monte Carlo, Bayesian, FRACAS, ALT, reliability-growth/recovery tests), software reliability (early prediction + reliability growth), and tailorable example RMA requirements for a Program Requirements Document. Scope limits: it is FAA/NAS-specific guidance (not a requirement, by its own statement), centred on hardware-plus-software availability — it brackets out human/service/facility/communications availability, names but does not reproduce the math derivations or external standards (MIL-STDs, IEEE 1633, RTCA DO-178C/DO-278A, SAE JA1011), is thin on detailed worked numerical examples and on safety-case method, and predates any current revision beyond 006D.

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。