「framing」の検索結果

Designs a realistic, execution-aware biomedical study version under explicit constraints of samples, time, budget, data access, lab capacity, team skill, and validation resources. Always use this skill when the user has a real study idea, a candidate route, or a partially framed project but cannot assume ideal conditions. If critical feasibility inputs are missing, first clarify what resources are currently available, what resources may be obtainable, and what resources are realistically unavailable. Do not invent access, capabilities, collaborations, or validation resources. Focus first on feasibility-constrained study framing, route narrowing, dependency control, and minimum viable study 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。

Designs a translational blueprint for moving a biomedical finding toward diagnosis, prognosis, treatment response prediction, patient stratification, or therapeutic development, with explicit translational milestones, validation thresholds, and feasibility-sensitive route framing.

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 primary aims, secondary aims, and testable hypotheses from broad biomedical research ideas. Use this skill when a user needs to convert a loose study idea into a tighter protocol-framing structure with clear aim hierarchy, hypothesis discipline, and separation between hypothesis-driven and exploratory components. Always keep aims answerable, non-overlapping, and aligned to the intended evidence type and study scope.

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。

Explains why studies on the same biomedical topic reach different or opposing conclusions by auditing differences in population, endpoint definition, sample source, assay or platform, study design, statistical model, adjustment strategy, validation chain, and bias control. It separates true contradiction from apparent contradiction caused by framing or methods. Never fabricate references, PMIDs, DOIs, trial identifiers, dataset details, platform details, study features, or conflict explanations that are not supported by the input.

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。

Evidence-based medical knowledge and research mentor grounded in the Bian Que tradition. Covers clinical reasoning, diagnostic thinking (望闻问切), pharmacology, pathology, differential diagnosis, medical literature appraisal, and the philosophy of early intervention. Trigger whenever users ask about medicine, clinical science, drugs, disease mechanisms, diagnosis, lab interpretation, treatment comparison, or health sciences. Even without explicit research framing, trigger on any topic touching disease, therapeutics, or clinical decision-making. Part of the AIPOCH Medical Research Skill Hub.

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。

Drafts journal-ready cover letters for manuscript submission. Use when preparing a submission package, communicating the manuscript's contributions and journal fit to editors, or tailoring the novelty framing for a specific journal's scope. Also triggers on "write a cover letter for my paper", "draft a submission cover letter", "help me write to the editor", or "cover letter for [journal name]".

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。

Composes a Discussion around key findings, mechanisms, clinical relevance, and limitations. Use when writing or improving a Discussion section for any biomedical manuscript — including interpreting results, connecting to prior literature, addressing unexpected findings, framing limitations, and writing the conclusion. Also triggers on "write my discussion", "help me discuss my findings", "how do I compare to prior studies", "write the limitations paragraph", or "draft a discussion for my paper".

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。

Acknowledges limitations in sample, design, measurement, and validation in a professional way that improves credibility without undermining the whole paper. Use when writing the limitations paragraph of a Discussion section, preparing a grant risk assessment, responding to reviewers about study weaknesses, or framing scope boundaries for a paper. Also triggers on "write my limitations", "how should I address the limitation of", "reviewer said my sample is too small", or "help me word this limitation".

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。

Interactive interview that formalizes a fuzzy research idea into a structured spec (RQ, hypotheses, identification, data needs, empirical strategy). Use when user says "interview me", "help me think through this idea", "I have a half-baked idea", "formalize this into a project", "walk me through framing a study". Multi-turn Q&A; saves spec to disk. NOT for lit review (`/lit-review`) or ideation from scratch (`/research-ideation`).

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。

Research-only RPI playbook that gathers task evidence, writes dated research artifacts under .copilot-tracking/research/ or a caller's trusted evidence root, and hands off planning-ready findings. Use when the user needs evidence, alternatives, or task framing first.

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。

Create or assess an evidence-grounded, falsifiable outcome hypothesis: a testable prediction of what measurable business result will change, for whom, by when, and how leading and lagging indicators will prove or disprove it. Use when framing measurable outcomes, turning an MVP, POC, feature, or technical initiative into a beneficiary result, defining targets and indicators, or judging whether evidence is strong enough to invest. Also applies to business outcome hypotheses, value hypotheses, and outcome statements.

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。

Coach a UX practitioner through problem framing, running a design critique, or making an evidence-backed case to a skeptical stakeholder. Use when the practitioner has a live UX task and wants to think it through rather than receive an answer.

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。

Build game cameras that feel good — 2D follow with a deadzone, look-ahead, smoothing, and level-bounds clamping; 3D third-person orbit with collision and first-person look; plus multi-target framing and a shake hook. Engine-neutral techniques that pair with the engine's camera node and rigs like Unity Cinemachine or Godot Camera2D/PhantomCamera. Use when the user mentions camera follow, follow camera, deadzone, look-ahead, camera smoothing, camera bounds/ limits, third-person camera, orbit camera, first-person look, Cinemachine, or camera jitter.

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。

Decode an insurance claim denial letter — what the cited reason actually means, whether it's commonly overturnable, and the appeal letter that answers it point by point. Use when someone asks 'my insurance claim was denied what do I do', 'decode this denial letter', 'can I appeal this denial', or 'write my insurance appeal'. Produces the denial decode with overturn-likelihood framing, the evidence checklist, the point-by-point appeal letter, and the escalation ladder past the insurer.

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。

Help users navigate the psychological burdens of leadership by cultivating emotional awareness, reframing failure, and building sustainable mental health practices.

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 explicitly sets an Aegis goal with /aegis-goal, Aegis goal:, or asks to define goal, success evidence, stop condition, or task boundaries before 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。

Use when revising an AISTATS paper for concise AI-statistics framing, theorem-and-experiment clarity, 8-page two-column compression, double-blind wording, reproducibility clarity, statistically careful claims, and assumption-labeling discipline that survives statistician reviewers.

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 targeting Nature Plants or deciding whether a plant-science manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the broad-significance and Nature-framing bar, evidence and reproducibility expectations, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

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 deciding whether a project is a strong AISTATS fit, comparing AISTATS with NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, UAI, COLT, JMLR, statistics journals, or application venues, identifying the statistical primitive of the contribution, and sharpening the AI-statistics framing before writing begins.

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 targeting Global Change Biology or deciding whether a biology/ecology manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the global-change-driver framing and biological-evidence bar, scale and mechanism expectations, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics.

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 deciding which English agriculture / environment / earth-science journal skill to invoke next, comparing fit across the 30-journal agriculture-and-environment roadmap, or routing a manuscript before venue-specific re-framing. Routes by sub-field (agronomy / plant / soil / food / environment / earth / climate), contribution type, and evidence shape (field trial / lab assay / observational survey / model / dataset).

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 revising prose, the abstract, or the introduction of an American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics (AEJ: Macro) manuscript for AEA house style and the broad-interest macro arc. Late-stage polish on framing and clarity; it does not fix identification, the model, or exhibits.

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 writing the response to an Agricultural Systems (AgSy) revision decision. AgSy review is single anonymized with at least two expert systems reviewers and an editor decision, and revisions often turn on model evaluation, sensitivity/uncertainty, and trade-off framing. The response must convert each reviewer without alienating the editor. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.

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 an Advanced Materials result is sound but its central advance and significance are not yet sharp, or when a Communication's opening paragraph must double as its abstract. Structures the one-advance narrative; does not run characterization or design 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。