本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

results-report

This skill should be used when the user asks to "write an experiment report", "summarize experimental results", "do experiment retrospection", "write a results report", "写实验总结报告", "写实验复盘", or mentions turning completed experiment artifacts into a structured, decision-oriented research report. It assumes strict analysis should come from `results-analysis` first.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(8)

  • SKILL.md5.5 KB
  • examples/example-results-report.md3.9 KB
  • references/decision-oriented-analysis.md542 B
  • references/EVIDENCE-PROPAGATION.md896 B
  • references/figure-interpretation.md628 B
  • references/report-naming.md1.0 KB
  • references/report-structure.md1.4 KB
  • references/statistical-completeness.md543 B

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。

Results Report

Write the complete post-experiment summary report after analysis artifacts are ready.

This skill is for the stage after results-analysis.

Role boundary

results-analysis does

  • strict statistics,
  • real figures,
  • figure interpretation scaffolding,
  • stats appendix.

results-report does

  • complete experiment wrap-up report,
  • decision-oriented narrative,
  • figure-by-figure interpretation inside a coherent structure,
  • limitations, failure cases, and next actions,
  • Obsidian write-back into Results/Reports/.

Do not replace strict analysis with confident prose. If the analysis bundle is missing, first identify the blocker and request or produce the missing bundle.

Default output

The default report is an internal research report, not manuscript prose.

It should be named as:

YYYY-MM-DD--{experiment-line}--r{round}--{purpose}.md

Example:

  • 2026-03-18--freezing--r03--transfer-summary.md
  • 2026-03-18--contrastive-adversarial--r02--ablation-report.md

The note title should be:

{Experiment Line} / Round {N} / {Purpose} / {YYYY-MM-DD}

Read references/report-naming.md before finalizing the filename or note title.

Required frontmatter

---
type: results-report
date: 2026-03-18
experiment_line: freezing
round: 3
purpose: transfer-summary
status: active
source_artifacts:
  - analysis-output/analysis-report.md
  - analysis-output/stats-appendix.md
linked_experiments:
  - Experiments/Freezing-Study.md
linked_results:
  - Results/Freezing-vs-Adapter.md
---

Default report structure

The report must include all sections below.

  1. Executive Summary
  2. Experiment Identity and Decision Context
  3. Setup and Evaluation Protocol
  4. Main Findings
  5. Statistical Validation
  6. Figure-by-Figure Interpretation
  7. Failure Cases / Negative Results / Limitations
  8. What Changed Our Belief
  9. Next Actions
  10. Artifact and Reproducibility Index

Read references/report-structure.md before writing.

Workflow

1. Confirm the report object

Lock these fields first:

  • date,
  • experiment line,
  • round,
  • purpose,
  • linked experiment note,
  • linked durable result note if one already exists.

If round is unknown, do not silently invent a semantic round. Use r00 only as a temporary placeholder and state that it should be normalized later.

2. Read the strict analysis bundle

Minimum required inputs:

  • analysis-report.md
  • stats-appendix.md
  • figure-catalog.md
  • actual figures, if available

If these are missing, either generate them first with results-analysis or explicitly state which claims cannot be supported.

3. Write the report as a decision object

This report is not a transcript of outputs.

Each section must answer a real question:

  • What did we test?
  • What changed numerically?
  • What is actually supported?
  • What failed or remains uncertain?
  • What should we do next?

Read references/decision-oriented-analysis.md for the expected reasoning depth.

4. Interpret figures inside the report

Do not only attach figures.

For each main figure:

  • introduce why it is included,
  • state the key observation,
  • explain the supported interpretation,
  • explain the decision implication.

Read references/figure-interpretation.md and references/statistical-completeness.md as needed.

5. Choose the write target explicitly

If the current repo is bound to an Obsidian project knowledge base:

  • create or update Results/Reports/{report-name}.md,
  • link back to the relevant Experiments/ note,
  • update the matching canonical Results/ note when a durable conclusion is now supported,
  • append a short trace to today's Daily/ note,
  • update .claude/project-memory/<project_id>.md.

If the repo is not bound:

  • write the report as a local markdown artifact in the requested output location or next to the analysis bundle,
  • keep the same filename contract,
  • explicitly say that no Obsidian write-back was attempted.

Use obsidian-project-memory conventions only for bound repos. Internal experiment reports belong in Results/Reports/, not Writing/.

6. End with explicit next actions

The report must end with operational decisions, for example:

  • stop a weak branch,
  • schedule one missing ablation,
  • promote a stable finding into manuscript-facing writing,
  • update the active plan.

Required quality bar

  • The report must be dateable, searchable, and attributable to one experiment line and one round.
  • The report must cite actual evidence from the analysis bundle.
  • The report must include negative results when they matter.
  • The report must separate stable conclusion from tentative interpretation.
  • The report must say what changed in project belief and what should happen next.

Reference files

Load only what is needed:

  • references/report-structure.md
  • references/report-naming.md
  • references/figure-interpretation.md
  • references/statistical-completeness.md
  • references/decision-oriented-analysis.md
  • references/EVIDENCE-PROPAGATION.md
  • examples/example-results-report.md

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-Skills4,5982026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-Skills4,5982026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-Skills4,5982026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-Skills4,5982026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-Skills4,5982026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-Skills4,5982026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