「versus」の検索結果

Design Microsoft Orleans systems from each primitive's purpose and failure model. USE FOR: grains, digital twins, state versus databases, transactions, messaging, streams, timers, reminders, Durable Jobs, stateless workers, grain services, startup, and hosting. DO NOT USE FOR: other actor stacks, batches, relational-only CRUD, or advice without an Orleans decision. INVOKES: inspect version and topology, choose the primitive, implement, and validate.

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 you need data access with Quarkus Hibernate ORM Panache — including PanacheEntity / PanacheEntityBase, PanacheRepository, named queries, JPQL, native SQL, DTO projections (project(Class)), pagination (Page.of()), N+1 avoidance (JOIN FETCH), optimistic locking (@Version / OptimisticLockException), @NamedQuery for validated reusable queries, transactions, @TestTransaction for test isolation, and immutable-friendly patterns. This is the Quarkus analogue to Spring Data for relational persistence. This should trigger for requests such as Review Panache entities or repositories in Quarkus; Improve Hibernate ORM data access with Panache; Add DTO projections, JOIN FETCH, pagination, or optimistic locking to Panache queries; Fix N+1 query problems or add @Version concurrency control in Quarkus Panache; Improve Panache active record versus repository design. Part of Plinth Toolkit

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。

Decision rubric for when an LM agent should write-and-run code (Program-of-Thought / code interpreter) versus reason in natural language: classify each step as deterministic- computable (emit + execute code, feed the result back) vs judgment (stay in prose). Use when designing or debugging an agent step that does arithmetic/parsing/data transforms, when prose reasoning hallucinates a computation (under-coding), or when a sandbox round- trip is wasted on a judgment task (over-coding). Search keywords: code interpreter, agent does math wrong, calculator hallucination, when to run code vs reason, program of thought, PoT, tool vs reasoning.

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。

Guides when to ask clarifying questions versus proceed autonomously. Use to reduce unnecessary clarifying questions when intent is clear.

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 run real static analysis over a diff or repo before shipping — Semgrep, CodeQL, secret scanning, dependency CVEs — and triage the findings into what must be fixed now versus noise. Trigger before a release or PR merge, during a security review, or when the user asks to scan the code for vulnerabilities.

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 designing a study that benchmarks AI systems against a human-expert panel, before data collection. Plans the arms, decoupled rubrics with anchors, planted calibration probes, reviewer panel, inter-rater reliability targets and LLM-as-judge versus human adjudication.

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 calling external HTTP APIs from Spring Boot 3 / Spring Framework 6 with declarative HttpExchange interfaces. Covers manual proxy registration, RestClient versus WebClient, and timeout and error handling 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。

Use when calling external HTTP APIs from Spring Boot 4 / Spring Framework 7 with declarative HttpExchange interfaces. Covers ImportHttpServices, grouped base URLs and timeouts, and RestClient versus WebClient selection.

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。

Implements the GDPR Article 17 right to erasure (right to be forgotten) workflow, covering all six grounds for erasure, five exceptions, technical deletion versus anonymization decisions, and third-party notification under Article 19. Activate for erasure request, deletion request, right to be forgotten, Art. 17 queries.

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。

Manages RoPA for complex multi-entity corporate groups including entity-level versus group-level records, intra-group transfer documentation, and shared processing coordination. Activate for group RoPA, multi-entity, corporate group, intra-group transfers, subsidiary records, holding company.

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。

Guides systematic assessment of current state versus GDPR requirements across all chapters with prioritised remediation matrix. Activate when starting compliance programmes or conducting periodic reassessment. Keywords: gap analysis, compliance assessment, remediation matrix, GDPR readiness.

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。

Manages deletion requests for children's personal data. Covers parental-initiated versus child-initiated requests, age of capacity assessment, identity verification, scope determination, third-party notification obligations, and regulatory timelines under GDPR Art. 17, COPPA Section 312.6, and UK AADC Standard 15. Keywords: deletion, children, right to erasure, parental request, data deletion, COPPA.

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。

Evaluates and implements age estimation and verification technologies for online services. Covers facial age estimation, digital ID verification, self-declaration with risk assessment, AI-based age estimation, and the accuracy versus privacy tradeoff. Includes ICO guidance and euCONSENT framework. Keywords: age verification, age estimation, facial analysis, digital ID, children, online safety.

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。

Implements age-gating mechanisms for online services to restrict access based on user age. Covers hard gates versus soft gates, neutral age prompts, re-verification triggers, circumvention prevention, and regulatory requirements under GDPR, COPPA, UK Online Safety Act, and DSA. Keywords: age gate, age restriction, neutral prompt, children, online services, access control.

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 short cinematic encounters that move from calm observation to an impossible close appearance, a readable startle response, and a restrained truce gesture for MiniMax H3 or Seedance 2.0. Use when a user wants fantasy-versus-technology contrast, cockpit or window eyelines, pursuit compressed into 4–15 seconds, non-lethal escalation, identity-reference continuity, or a tense scene that resolves through performance instead of injury or dialogue exposition.

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。

Applies the reasoning, architectural principles, and AI philosophy of Christopher Manning (natural language processing expert, Stanford University, director of Stanford AI Lab). Use this skill whenever you are discussing natural language processing, LLM architecture, AI research strategy, cognitive science, or the evolution of machine learning. Trigger this skill for questions about AGI timelines, academic vs. industry research trade-offs, linguistic structure in neural networks, modularity in AI design, or evaluating true intelligence versus mere memorization. Channel his pragmatic focus on domain science, adaptability, and competing on ideas rather than raw compute.

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 channels the reasoning of Yann LeCun, Chief AI Scientist at Meta and Turing Award winner. Use this skill whenever you are evaluating AI architectures, discussing the limitations of Large Language Models (LLMs), debating AI safety and regulation (anti-doomerism), or designing autonomous machine intelligence. It is highly relevant for topics involving self-supervised learning, open-source AI strategy, world models, physical grounding versus text-based learning, and objective-driven AI systems. Trigger this skill to apply his frameworks on abstract representation learning (JEPA) and energy-based models, even if the user doesn't explicitly name him.

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。

Reach for this skill whenever you are discussing reinforcement learning, agentic AI systems, AI alignment, continual learning, or the philosophical limits of large language models. This skill channels the thinking of Richard S. Sutton (reinforcement learning pioneer, University of Alberta, Keen Technologies, 2024 Turing Award). Use it to evaluate AI architectures, make long-term AI prognostications, or design systems that learn from runtime experience rather than static datasets. Apply his frameworks when users ask about AGI, the 'Bitter Lesson' of computation, the Reward Hypothesis, or decentralized cooperation versus centralized AI control.

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。

Apply the bioengineering, mechanobiology, and lymphatic transport reasoning of J. Brandon Dixon, professor of mechanical and biomedical engineering at Georgia Institute of Technology. Reach for this skill whenever analyzing lymphatic biomechanics, active vessel contractility versus passive drainage, peristaltic fluid transport, microfluidic organ-on-a-chip design, preclinical lymphedema models, non-invasive functional imaging, targeted nanomedicine delivery, or automated disease staging. Use this skill to critique bioengineering assumptions, guide quantitative protocol design, evaluate biomechanical pump failure, and formulate interdisciplinary biomedical solutions.

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。

Applies the reasoning, principles, and frameworks of Jürgen Schmidhuber (LSTM co-inventor and deep learning pioneer). Reach for this skill whenever tackling problems involving sequence learning, artificial curiosity, intrinsic motivation, reinforcement learning architectures, or predicting long-term technological and cosmic evolution. Use this when discussing AGI timelines, the history and attribution of AI breakthroughs, data compression as learning, or when designing autonomous agents that must set their own goals. Trigger this skill for topics like recurrent neural networks, algorithmic information theory, open-source AI democratization, and evaluating true existential risks versus media hype.

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。

Think and work like an expert Mathematical Analyst. Use when a task calls for Mathematical Analyst judgment. Reasons from function-space topology, convergence modes, and constant-dependent inequalities (Hölder, Sobolev, Gronwall) through compactness theorems (Rellich-Kondrachov, Banach-Alaoglu), Calderon-Zygmund and Schauder estimates, and Lax-Milgram while treating limit-integral swaps without dominated convergence, boundary-degenerating constants, weak-versus-classical regularity gaps, and concentration-compactness loss as first-class failure modes.

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。

Think and work like an expert Medicinal Chemist. Use when a task calls for Medicinal Chemist judgment. Reasons from structure-activity relationships, lipophilicity and unbound-fraction physicochemistry, synthetic accessibility, and target-product-profile multiparameter optimization through LLE/Fsp3/QED scoring, FEP+/Glide docking validated against co-crystal and SPR data, ELN-tracked LC-MS/NMR synthesis, and DMPK panels (microsomal CL, Caco-2 efflux, hERG, CYP) while treating PAINS and aggregation assay artifacts, biochemical-versus-cellular potency gaps, reactive-metabolite soft spots, and freedom-to-operate cliffs as first-class failure modes.

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。

Think and work like an expert Medical Parasitologist. Use when a task calls for Medical Parasitologist judgment. Reasons from specimen-stage fit, exposure-based pretest probability, and antigen-versus-antibody kinetics through thick/thin Giemsa films, formalin-ethyl-acetate concentration with trichrome, multiplex PCR, and EITB serology against CDC DPDx and WHO algorithms, while treating pfhrp2/3-deleted RDT false-negatives, single-O&P misses of Strongyloides, and colonization-mistaken-for-infection as first-class failure modes.

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。

Think and work like an expert Molecular Biologist. Use when a task calls for Molecular Biologist judgment. Reasons from central-dogma sequence flow, binding affinity (Kd/Km/kcat), gene regulation, and biological-versus-technical replicate structure through MIQE-compliant RT-qPCR, ddPCR, Western/flow/microscopy, CRISPR editing with rescue, and IWGAV antibody validation while treating off-target reagent effects, batch effects, mycoplasma and cell-line misidentification, and toxicity-driven artifacts as first-class failure modes.

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。