| name | experiment-planner |
| description | Plan deep-learning and computer-science research ideas into claim-driven experiment matrices. Use when Codex needs to discuss research directions, expand ideas, design methods, plan pilot experiments, ablations, diagnostics, robustness checks, failure analysis, GPU/subagent experiment coordination, or decide whether a DL/CS idea can support a strong paper story before writing. |
Experiment Planner
Overview
Use this skill before paper writing when the user needs to turn a research idea
into a testable story and experiment plan. It is an adapter over existing
research-agent ideas, not a replacement for the user's writing, review,
rebuttal, figure, evidence, or GitHub release skills.
Core Boundaries
- Default domain: general deep learning and computer science research. Adapt to
collaborative perception, 3D perception, or autonomous driving only when the
task context calls for it.
- Do not write Markdown, JSON, reports, logs, or experiment documents unless the
user explicitly asks for saved artifacts.
- Do not launch long experiments, deploy GPU jobs, modify code, or retry failed
runs unless the user explicitly asks for execution.
- Do not replace
paper-section-playbook, paper-refinement-skills,
paper-review-panel, rebuttal-response-skills, paper-visual-craft, or
github-project-release; hand off to them only after the research plan or
results are ready.
- Treat external projects as references, not installed dependencies. Read
references/source-map.md before discussing provenance or upgrading this
skill from upstream sources.
Default Workflow
- Grill consensus: use
$grill-me style interaction to clarify problem,
motivation, proposed claim, baseline/control, compute budget, success
criteria, and unacceptable shortcuts. Ask one high-impact question at a time
when the answer changes the experiment plan.
- Literature inspiration: after a preliminary consensus, use
$research-evidence for related papers, novelty risk, prior experiment
patterns, and unsupported claims. Use $search-first when the task may need
existing code, datasets, tools, or implementations.
- Story viability check: decide whether the idea can support a clean paper
story: important problem, credible gap, specific method difference, feasible
validation, and claims that will not outrun the evidence.
- Claim freeze: freeze the smallest verifiable claim before planning runs.
Avoid changing the story repeatedly while experiments are running.
- Idea validation first: design the smallest pilot/smoke/sanity experiment
that can falsify or support the core hypothesis. If multiple GPUs are idle,
parallelize only independent exploration runs with clear ownership.
- Matrix expansion: only after the pilot passes, expand to main result,
ablation, diagnostic, robustness, efficiency, qualitative, and failure
analysis runs.
- Subagent coordination: keep the main session responsible for planning,
task decomposition, and final result acceptance. Use
explorer for read-only
repo/config/protocol investigation. Use worker for implementation with
explicit file or module ownership. Do not manually override subagent model or
reasoning settings unless the user explicitly requests it.
- Run discipline: test that the command starts and produces plausible small
outputs; remove test data after smoke checks; launch the full run only after
sanity passes; inspect the first few samples/logs/artifacts; stop continuous
monitoring once the run is confirmed healthy unless the user asks otherwise.
Output Contract
Default to a concise in-chat experiment matrix. Before producing a matrix, read
references/experiment-matrix.md.
The matrix must include:
research question
core hypothesis
storyline
literature inspiration
baseline/control
idea validation experiment
expected signal
failure modes
diagnostic checks
follow-up experiments
subagent/task ownership
compute/resource assumptions
success gate
next action
Use unknown or needs user input for unresolved fields instead of inventing
project facts. Keep recommendations executable, but do not perform execution
inside this skill unless the user asks for implementation or running commands.
Handoff Rules
- Use
$research-evidence before making novelty, citation, or literature
coverage claims.
- Use
$search-first before proposing new implementation utilities, pipelines,
tool integrations, or dataset-processing code.
- Use writing skills only after the experiment story is stable enough to draft
a paper section, rebuttal, review, table, or figure.
- For code work, assign
worker tasks with disjoint write scopes and remind the
worker not to revert others' changes.
- For investigation, assign
explorer tasks that are specific, read-only, and
non-overlapping with the main session's current work.
Failure Modes To Catch
- The idea is interesting but not falsifiable with available data or compute.
- The proposed contribution is only a presentation change, not a testable method
or analysis difference.
- The baseline/control is missing, unfair, or weaker than the claim requires.
- The pilot experiment cannot distinguish mechanism from implementation noise.
- The plan jumps to full benchmark runs before smoke and sanity checks pass.
- The story changes after seeing results without recording a clear reason.
- Subagents receive vague tasks, overlapping write scopes, or authority to run
long jobs without main-session acceptance.