本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

identify

Design or review identification strategy for the sewage-house-prices project. Produces strategy memos with estimand, assumptions, pseudo-code, robustness plan, falsification tests, and referee objection anticipation. This skill should be used when asked to "design the strategy", "identify the effect", "write a strategy memo", or "think through identification".

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Identification Strategy

Design or review an identification strategy for the sewage-house-prices project.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — a research question, approach name (e.g. "hedonic", "dry spills"), or "review existing" to audit all current strategies.


Project-Specific Context

Existing Strategies

  1. Hedonic — Cross-sectional: log(price) ~ spill_metrics + controls | lsoa + year_quarter. Assumption: spill exposure is conditionally exogenous given LSOA FE.
  2. Repeat sales — Within-property: Δlog(price) ~ Δspill_metrics | house_id. Eliminates time-invariant unobservables.
  3. Long difference — Grid-level: changes in average prices within 250m grids. Eliminates level differences.
  4. News/media DiD — Treatment = post-media-coverage × exposure. Tests whether information matters for capitalisation.
  5. Upstream/downstream — River network topology via PostGIS. Downstream sites receive upstream pollution. Tests directionality.
  6. Dry spills — Spills without rainfall. If dry spills affect prices, suggests awareness/stigma channel over physical damage.
  7. Hydraulic capacity instrument — Planned IV using sewer capacity as instrument for spill frequency.

Key Data Features

  • EDM data: 2021-2024+, high-frequency (event-level)
  • Land Registry: universe of transactions
  • Zoopla: rental listings
  • Met Office: daily rainfall at LSOA level
  • River networks: PostGIS topology
  • Treatment radii: 250m, 500m, 1000m, 2000m, 5000m, 10000m

Workflow

Step 1: Context Gathering

  1. Read existing manuscript sections in docs/overleaf/ for how strategies are currently described
  2. Read relevant analysis scripts in scripts/R/09_analysis/
  3. Read scripts/R/utils/spill_aggregation_utils.R for treatment construction
  4. Check docs/overleaf/refs.bib for methodological references

Step 2: Strategy Development

For a new or revised strategy, produce:

  1. Strategy memo — Design choice, estimand (ATT/ATE/LATE), key assumptions, comparison group
  2. Estimating equation — LaTeX-formatted with clear variable definitions
  3. Pseudo-code — Implementation sketch (what the R code will do)
  4. Robustness plan — Ordered list with rationale:
    • Radius sensitivity (250m → 10km)
    • Time period variation (prior period vs full period)
    • Alternative treatment measures (count vs hours vs binary)
    • Subsample analysis (sales vs rentals, urban vs rural)
  5. Falsification tests — What SHOULD NOT show effects and why
  6. Referee objection anticipation — Top 5 objections with pre-emptive responses

Step 3: Strategy Review

If reviewing an existing strategy:

Phase 1: Claim Identification

  • What is the claimed design?
  • What is the estimand?
  • What is the treatment / comparison?

Phase 2: Core Design Validity

  • Are identifying assumptions stated and defensible?
  • Are the biggest threats acknowledged?
  • Does the specification match the stated design?

Phase 3: Robustness Assessment

  • Does the robustness plan address the right concerns?
  • Are falsification tests well-chosen?
  • Is there radius sensitivity analysis?

Step 4: Present Results

# Identification Strategy: [Approach]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Design:** [Hedonic / Repeat Sales / Long Diff / DiD / IV / etc.]
**Estimand:** [ATT / ATE / LATE]

## Strategy Summary
[2-3 sentence description]

## Estimating Equation
$$\log(p_{it}) = \alpha + \beta \cdot \text{SpillMetric}_{it} + \gamma X_{it} + \mu_i + \delta_t + \varepsilon_{it}$$

## Key Assumptions
1. [Assumption 1] — [defense]
2. [Assumption 2] — [defense]

## Assessment: [SOUND / CONCERNS / CRITICAL ISSUES]

## Robustness Plan (ordered)
1. [Most important check]
2. [Second check]
...

## Falsification Tests
1. [Test 1] — [expected null and why]

## Anticipated Referee Objections
1. [Objection] — [Response]

## Next Steps
- [ ] Implement main specification
- [ ] Run falsification tests
- [ ] Generate pre-trend evidence

Save to output/log/strategy_memo_[approach].md.


Principles

  • Catch problems before coding. A flawed strategy caught now saves weeks of wasted analysis.
  • Multiple strategies are strength. This paper uses 6+ approaches — consistency across them is the key argument.
  • Cross-reference approaches. Each strategy should address threats the others cannot.
  • The user decides. Present trade-offs, don't make choices unilaterally.
  • Strategy memo is the contract. Once approved, analysis scripts implement it faithfully.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

a1

無料

VS-Enhanced Research Question Refiner - Prevents Mode Collapse and derives differentiated research questions Enhanced VS 3-Phase process: Modal question avoidance, alternatives presentation, differentiated RQ recommendation Use when: refining research ideas, formulating research questions, clarifying scope Triggers: research question, 연구 질문, PICO, SPIDER, research idea

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

a2

無料

VS-Enhanced Theoretical Framework Architect with Critique & Visualization Full VS 5-Phase process: Modal theory avoidance, Long-tail exploration, differentiated framework presentation Absorbed A3 (Devil's Advocate) critique and A6 (Conceptual Framework Visualizer) capabilities Use when: building theoretical foundations, designing conceptual models, deriving hypotheses, critiquing frameworks, visualizing models Triggers: theoretical framework, 이론적 프레임워크, conceptual model, 개념적 모형, hypothesis derivation, critique, devil's advocate, 반론, visualization, diagram

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

a5

無料

Agent A5 - Paradigm & Worldview Advisor - Philosophical foundations for research design. Covers ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology alignment. Use when: establishing philosophical foundations, justifying methodological choices, writing positionality statements Triggers: paradigm, 패러다임, ontology, epistemology, worldview, 세계관, philosophical foundations, 철학적 기초

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Academic paper writing skill with 12-agent pipeline. v2.5: Style Calibration (learn author's writing voice from past papers) + Writing Quality Check (writing quality checklist for natural prose). Supports IMRaD, literature review, theoretical, case study, policy brief, and conference paper structures. APA 7.0 (default), Chicago, MLA, IEEE, Vancouver citation formats. Bilingual abstracts (zh-TW + EN). Multi-format output (LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, Markdown). Triggers on: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, guide my paper, parse reviews, revision roadmap, 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 檢查引用, 引導我寫論文, 帶我規劃論文, 逐章規劃, 論文架構, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖.

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial 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。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する