123 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Check an educational practice or task for cultural bias, WEIRD assumptions, and cross-cultural validity. Use when adapting resources for diverse contexts or questioning universal claims.
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 a proposed assessment for construct validity, reliability, and alignment to learning objectives. Use when reviewing or quality-assuring assessments before deployment.
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 paper's EVALUATION DESIGN actually measures what it claims and whether its reporting is complete — the validity layer family D (experiment-forensics) cannot reach. Three patterns: train/test leakage means the reported score may not measure generalization (HP-EVAL-LEAKAGE — adopts the Kapoor & Narayanan 8-type / 3-category leakage taxonomy; the illegitimate-proxy / sampling-bias / pretraining-contamination subtypes hand off as needs_external_check, naming but NEVER running Oren-2023 exchangeability / Shi-2023 Min-K% / Golchin-2023 Time-Travel / BIG-bench canary); a load-bearing LLM judge is conflicted (same model/family as a compared system) or unvalidated (no human-agreement, no bias control) (HP-JUDGE-VALIDITY); a declared condition/metric is dropped or switched to favor the method, or 'best' is chosen with no held-out set (HP-SELECTIVE-REPORTING). Verdict-bearing at L0/L1 from the DESCRIBED protocol — NOT repo-gated like experiment-forensics; L2 only CONFIRMS against split/preprocessing/result files. A fresh cross-model reviewer (gpt-5.6-sol xhigh, read-only, fresh thread per pass) PROPOSES findings, each span-anchored to a ledger claim_id; tools/adjudicate_findings.py DECIDES the verdict. Leakage and under-reporting are usually HONEST methodological errors — every finding describes a discrepancy to CHECK, never an accusation. An LLM generating GROUND-TRUTH labels is HP-FAKE-GT (experiment-forensics) — routed there, not here. Emits eval-design-forensics.findings.json; computes NO verdict. Detect-only. Triggers: "eval design audit", "evaluation validity", "train/test leakage", "data leakage", "is the score measuring generalization", "LLM judge bias", "is the judge validated", "selective reporting", "cherry-picked results", "评估设计审计", "评测有效性", "数据泄漏", "训练测试集泄漏", "裁判模型有没有验证", "选择性报告".
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。
Check an educational practice or task for cultural bias, WEIRD assumptions, and cross-cultural validity. Use when adapting resources for diverse contexts or questioning universal claims.
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 a proposed assessment for construct validity, reliability, and alignment to learning objectives. Use when reviewing or quality-assuring assessments before deployment.
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 a defendant's Answer with Invalidity Contentions responding to a U.S. patent infringement complaint. Covers FRCP 8(b) admissions/denials, affirmative defenses, and PLR 3-3 invalidity contentions with claim charts under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, 112. Use when representing a defendant in the pleadings phase of federal patent litigation who must respond to an infringement suit and assert prior art, anticipation, obviousness, or § 112 defenses.
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 or review an element chart — a patent claim chart (infringement, invalidity, or review) or a civil element chart for any cause of action or defense — with every cell pin-cited and gap detection as the priority output. Use when the user asks for a claim chart, element chart, proof chart, infringement or invalidity contention, element-by-element mapping, or asks "what are we missing to prove [claim]".
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。
Routes between five assessment pathways — formative, rubric/criteria, authentic/performance, peer/self, and diagnostic — with validity and equity checks. Use when a teacher needs help choosing how to assess.
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 Comparative Medicine Researcher. Use when a task calls for Comparative Medicine Researcher judgment. Reasons from species biology, translational validity, and the 3Rs through model-validity frameworks, IACUC protocols, ARRIVE 2.0 reporting, and FELASA/AALAS health surveillance while treating substrain drift, subclinical colony infection (murine norovirus, pinworm, Mycoplasma), analgesia-pathway confounds, and unstated husbandry variables 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。
Routes between five assessment pathways — formative, rubric/criteria, authentic/performance, peer/self, and diagnostic — with validity and equity checks. Use when a teacher needs help choosing how to assess.
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。
Query patent legal status information from the Nexscope (Nexscope) database. Triggered when users mention patent legal status, patent validity check, patent status query, patent event history, simple legal status, legal events such as transfer, license, pledge, opposition, litigation, re-examination, patent legal status, patent validity, patent events, transfer/license/pledge, Nexscope, or patent status lookup. Also triggered when users ask whether a patent is active, inactive, pending, expired, granted, withdrawn, or revoked, or want to look up legal status by patent ID or publication number.
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。
The logic of sentential connectives -- and, or, not, if-then, if-and-only-if -- as a formal system. Covers syntax (well-formed formulas), semantics (truth tables), satisfiability, validity, logical equivalence, normal forms (CNF, DNF), natural-deduction rules, and common translation pitfalls. Use when formalizing arguments with propositional structure, checking validity mechanically, or teaching the foundations of formal 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。
Systematic evaluation of arguments for structure, validity, soundness, and charitable interpretation. Covers premise identification, conclusion extraction, argument mapping, steel-manning, and the distinction between validity (form) and soundness (form plus true premises). Use when assessing an argument, reconstructing an opponent's position fairly, or preparing a rebuttal.
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 declared local review evaluation can support fair quality claims. Use only when the user explicitly asks to audit review-eval validity or use the bundled synthetic fixture.
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。
Diagnose when intuitive judgment, agent confidence, or expert routing can be trusted by classifying environment validity, feedback quality, and task-boundary fit. Use for confidence calibration, agent routing, expertise audits, and escalation design. NOT for deterministic implementation tasks, pure syntax debugging, or domains with explicit verifiable answers.
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。
Validates docked / generated protein-ligand poses using PoseBusters physical-validity tests, strain energy quantification, geometric checks (planarity, vdW overlap, bond/angle distortion), and pose-energy reasonableness. Filters AI-docking outputs (DiffDock, EquiBind, NeuralPLexer) where ~50% of poses fail physical-validity tests. Use when QC-ing docking results, comparing classical vs ML docking outputs, or filtering pose lists before SAR 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。
研究概要・中間発表予稿の「研究としての筋」を、論理の鎖(L1背景→L2関連研究と限界→L3課題(差分)→L4仮説→L5評価→L6位置づけ)として1リンクずつ採点し、さらに端点間の整合(掲げた構成概念=旗と評価指標=物差しのズレ=construct validity)を照合するスキル。各文の綺麗さ(→articulation-check)でも汎用の弱点(→weakness-analyze)でもなく「リンク間が繋がっているか／旗と物差しが一致しているか」を見る。骨子・位置づけ・仮説・課題設定・研究の一貫性を見てほしい、research framing を見て、と言われたとき。旧名 research-framing-check。
Validates docked / generated protein-ligand poses using PoseBusters physical-validity tests, strain energy quantification, geometric checks (planarity, vdW overlap, bond/angle distortion), and pose-energy reasonableness. Filters AI-docking outputs (DiffDock, EquiBind, NeuralPLexer) where ~50% of poses fail physical-validity tests. Use when QC-ing docking results, comparing classical vs ML docking outputs, or filtering pose lists before SAR 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。
Validates docked / generated protein-ligand poses using PoseBusters physical-validity tests, strain energy quantification, geometric checks (planarity, vdW overlap, bond/angle distortion), and pose-energy reasonableness. Filters AI-docking outputs (DiffDock, EquiBind, NeuralPLexer) where ~50% of poses fail physical-validity tests. Use when QC-ing docking results, comparing classical vs ML docking outputs, or filtering pose lists before SAR 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。
Diagnose when intuitive judgment, agent confidence, or expert routing can be trusted by classifying environment validity, feedback quality, and task-boundary fit. Use for confidence calibration, agent routing, expertise audits, and escalation design. NOT for deterministic implementation tasks, pure syntax debugging, or domains with explicit verifiable answers.
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。
Diagnose when intuitive judgment, agent confidence, or expert routing can be trusted by classifying environment validity, feedback quality, and task-boundary fit. Use for confidence calibration, agent routing, expertise audits, and escalation design. NOT for deterministic implementation tasks, pure syntax debugging, or domains with explicit verifiable answers.
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 scientific claims and evidence quality. Applies to experimental design validity, biases and confounders, statistical interpretation, evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), and teaching critical analysis. Supports evidence appraisal and identifying flaws; formal peer review writing belongs to peer-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。
Retrieves ClinGen gene-disease validity assertions for a public gene or disease, and reviews source-linked public evidence and literature for one supported GRCh38 germline nuclear SNV or simple indel through Folklore Clinical Variant Interpretation MCP. Used when a scientific agent must branch deterministically on resolved, ambiguous, not-found, invalid, unsupported, or unavailable variant outcomes; chain a resolved public variant into related literature or publication details; or preserve evidence provenance without accepting patient, phenotype, family, segregation, or private case 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。
Plans, configures, inspects, restarts, and analyzes bounded FluidSim computational-fluid-dynamics simulations with explicit numerical-validity and HPC safety checks. Use for FluidSim solver selection, parameter review, FFT/MPI setup, output diagnostics, or restart compatibility.
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。