「eth」の検索結果

Decompose total effects into direct and indirect paths through mediators using mediation, CMAverse 4-way, HIMA/HIMA2 high-dimensional, BAMA, two-step / MVMR mediation, or double-ML medDML. Use when testing whether a molecular phenotype (expression, methylation, protein) mediates a treatment-outcome relationship, decomposing exposure-mediator interaction via VanderWeele 4-way, screening high-dimensional EWAS mediators, or running MR-based mediation when sequential ignorability is implausible.

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。

Detect and adjust for horizontal pleiotropy in two-sample Mendelian randomization by distinguishing uncorrelated (UHP) from correlated (CHP) pleiotropy and choosing among Egger, MR-PRESSO, MR-RAPS, CAUSE, LHC-MR, LCV, MR-Clust, MR-Mix, and contamination-mixture methods. Use when validating an MR causal claim, running the STROBE-MR sensitivity battery, suspecting a shared heritable confounder, working under weak-instrument or polygenic-exposure regimes, or reconciling discordant estimates across robust methods.

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 whether two or more traits share a causal variant at a locus using Bayesian colocalization (coloc.abf, coloc.susie, HyPrColoc, moloc, eCAVIAR, SMR/HEIDI, PWCoCo, SharePro). Use when integrating GWAS with eQTL/sQTL/pQTL/mQTL, distinguishing shared causal variants from LD-driven coincidence, handling allelic heterogeneity, choosing between single-causal vs multi-causal methods, picking PP.H4 thresholds, running sensitivity over p12, or harmonising summary statistics for colocalization.

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。

Analyzes alternative splicing at single-cell resolution. The first decision is library chemistry — 10X 3' is fundamentally limited (RT primes from poly-A, R2 falls in 3' UTR, <0.1 junction read per cell per AS event). Plate-based full-length methods (Smart-seq3, FLASH-seq, VASA-seq, STORM-seq) and single-cell long-read (MAS-Iso-seq, scISOr-Seq2) are the chemistries that give per-cell isoform structure. Tools include MARVEL (R, Smart-seq integrated), BRIE2 (Bayesian PSI with regulatory features and ELBO_gain test), scQuint (junction-cluster, plate-based; not for 10X), SpliZ (annotation-free Z-score), Psix (graph-smoothness regulated AS), and Sierra (alternative polyadenylation, often confused with AS). Use when analyzing isoform usage in scRNA-seq, identifying cell-type-specific splicing, or determining whether scRNA-seq chemistry supports splicing analysis at all.

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 track recent and upcoming SMS methodology changes from FMCSA. Covers proposed rule changes, comment periods, and implementation timelines.

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 when the user asks about FMCSA Compliance Safety Accountability (CSA) program scoring — the seven BASIC categories, BASIC Severity Indicator (BSI), peer percentiles, intervention thresholds, how violations age out, SMS Methodology, ISS (Inspection Selection System), what "alert" status means, Safety Measurement System mechanics, or DataQ disputes. Cite SMS Methodology v3.20.

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。

Analytical methods for decomposing expert performance into cognitive and physical task components

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。

Refute-before-prove research discipline: automated counterexample sweeps before any formalization, meter-integrity audits for information-bound experiments, mutation-tested model checkers, pre-registered commit-or-cut gates for speculative directions, wrong-turn reporting, and numeric-claim provenance. Use when validating any new theorem, bound, equilibrium, or security claim; when building or trusting a checker, simulator, or experiment; or when deciding whether a speculative research direction lives or dies. NOT for exploratory brainstorming, product prioritization, writing style, or literature 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。

Audit whether a "current product focus receipt" (Decision/Now/Why-now/Evidence/Not-now/Cut-suspend/First-visible-proof/ Acceptance-gate/Kill-revisit-trigger/Owner/Review-date) and the work order it gates state a real, testable decision and a real agent launch — not planning-placeholder prose that sounds like an assignment but can't be proven. Use when deciding whether to launch an agent chain against a milestone or a stated "focus," when a work order lacks explicit input/output/owner/proof-gate, or when an acceptance gate would only prove a cached UI state instead of daemon truth. NOT for distinguishing roadmap items from energy-driven sidequests (legible-roadmap-with-sidequests), reviewing a PRD/prototype for product-completeness gaps like cold start or pricing (product-reality-reviewer), or accepting already-finished work against a personal acceptance bar (port-daddy-user-surrogate-pm-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。

Classify every destructive/gated action an agent body can attempt (git, filesystem, network, shell, github) into block/approve/allow tiers, and audit whether the pre-tool and post-tool governance backing that classification is real: blocked actions proven zero-side-effect by a negative fixture, every denial backed by a receipt and a transcript event, every block-tier denial paired with a safe alternative, and no unmanaged or same-UID body ever marked "contained." Use when building or reviewing Agent Harbor's C5 governance gate (destructive git blocker, approval request/result, denial receipts), gating a new tool surface before it can run destructive commands, or auditing whether an existing "destructive-action blocked" claim actually has evidence behind it. NOT for proving an existing sandbox boundary actually contains an adversary once an action is isolated (use sandboxed-adversarial-test-harness), deciding where in a DAG to place a human review node or designing the approval UX itself (use human-gate-designer), or designing the general work-receipt schema across an entire agent task (use agent-work-receipt-designer).

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。

Cognitive Systems Engineering design methodology for joint cognitive systems and human-centered automation

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。

Audit whether an enforced-coordination MCP has actually shrunk its ~19 legacy etiquette verbs into the 5 enforced tools — work/act/ask/recall/status — each carrying one denial shape and one transcript event, migrated through a real retirement path (intake-metadata, alias, or doc-history — never a parallel runtime), with zero legacy-verb calls once a body reaches compliance mode C4+. Use when reviewing a broker-collapse migration plan, gating a body's move from advisory (C0-C3) to enforced (C4+) coordination, or verifying IT-018 Broker Collapse compliance. NOT for the inbound trigger→spawn boundary that decides whether an event may spawn an agent at all (use fleet-event-spawn-trust), the capability-token cryptographic mechanism behind a denial (use agentic-zero-trust-security), designing how a swarm of agents invokes and shards work (use swarm-invocation-designer), or auditing an individual PR's mergeability (use agent-pr-authoring).

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。

Methodology for eliciting expert knowledge about cognitive processes, decisions, and mental models in complex tasks

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。

Audits an Articles of Agreement contract — the daemon-witnessed agreement every official Port Daddy agent signs covering registration, transcript reporting, tool-use gating, file claims, parley conduct, budget limits, and operator control — against the enforcement-beats-hope bar: a clause counts as safe only when it resolves to a concrete, daemon-observable mechanism with a defined denial shape, never a promise the agent might honor. Use when drafting a new agent's Articles, reviewing a compliance-level (C0-C6) claim, deciding whether a clause is genuinely enforced or merely documented, or auditing whether an agent's claimed identity can be trusted. NOT for securing the inbound event-to-spawn path (fleet-event-spawn-trust), designing the relay's transport PKI and signing keys (pd-relay-zero-trust), or tracking an agent's identity and reputation across its whole lifetime after it signs (agent-identity-continuity-reputation).

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。

Locate CCSPlayerInventory::m_pSOCache in CS2 server.dll / libserver.so via IDA Pro MCP and emit a fresh, minimal-unique signature or offset for the WeaponPaints gamedata entry "CCSPlayerInventory::m_pSOCache" (symbol CCSPlayerInventory_m_pSOCache). This is a STRUCT MEMBER OFFSET (schema netvar). Resolve the CCSPlayerInventory class layout via the schema system; m_pSOCache is the CGCClientSharedObjectCache pointer member. Cross-check: CCSPlayerInventory methods load this pointer and pass it to CGCClientSharedObjectCache methods (the GetItemInLoadout shortlist is a strong caller-side witness). Trigger: CCSPlayerInventory_m_pSOCache, CCSPlayerInventory::m_pSOCache

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 "PR を出す前に確認して", "check if this branch is ready to merge", "run pre-PR checks", "PRを作る前にチェックして", or wants to verify a branch before opening a pull request. Executes verification commands, validates Conventional Commits format, and confirms documentation is updated, then reports whether gh pr create is safe to run.

This skill should be used when the user wants to "investigate a bug", "debug an issue", "figure out why something is happening", "find the root cause", "troubleshoot", "強い推論で調査", "仮説を立てて検証", "原因を特定", "バグの原因調査", "なぜ動かないか調べて", "問題を切り分け", "原因不明", "デバッグ", or mentions systematic hypothesis-driven debugging. NOTE: Use this for investigating UNKNOWN causes, not for validating design proposals (use devils-advocate for that).

Analyze an idea, proposal, change, claim, or decision from facts through problem, value, mechanism, consequences, evidence, alternatives, and action. Use when the user asks what something is for, why it matters, whether it is worth doing, what impact it has, or how to decide. Do not use for simple factual lookup or straightforward execution.

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。

Paces a Claude subscription's usage — how fast to spend this week, what can still run at N% weekly, whether planned work fits before a reset. Reads the 5-hour, weekly, per-model and CI-minutes meters, sets a spend mode (normal, pace, turbo, overnight, work-day, owner-away, reset-eve) and re-cuts waves that don't fit. Also when something ate usage overnight, CI minutes run low, context runs high (compact or clear?), a new model needs a measured baseline, or which skill or subagent used tokens; or say pacewright (check, mode, fit, context, uba, baseline, spend, refresh). The plan table is dispatchwright's; the handoff, handoffwright's; one artifact's cost, skillwright's slim; the meter statusline, rigwright's; a scheduled check, agentwright's.

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。

Regulatory review across 14 frameworks — compliance review, privacy impact assessment, regulatory gap analysis, data subject rights, consent mechanisms, audit trail, AI ethics review, data flow mapping. Covers GDPR, PIPEDA, HIPAA, PCI-DSS, SOC2, UAE-PDPL, EU AI Act and more.

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。

Refactoring using Extract Methods in Java Language

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。

Look up Microsoft API references, find working code samples, and verify SDK code is correct. Use when working with Azure SDKs, .NET libraries, or Microsoft APIs—to find the right method, check parameters, get working examples, or troubleshoot errors. Catches hallucinated methods, wrong signatures, and deprecated patterns by querying official docs.

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。