Skip to main content

scientific-research-design-method

Structure evidence-aware scientific research decisions with competing hypotheses, disconfirming predictions, uncertainty, rigor, feasibility, ethics, safety, and review gates. Use for research scoping, early study concepts, or prioritizing candidate directions without confusing ideas with findings.

Informações da origem

Repositório
yangheng95/opencorvus
Última atividade na origem
10 de agosto de 2026 às 15:26
Idioma detectado do SKILL.md
inglês
Estrelas
312
Forks
40

Opções de instalação

Por padrão, está selecionado o prompt que primeiro revisa a origem. Você pode mudar para um comando direto ou baixar uma cópia local.

Revise os arquivos de origem

Leia o SKILL.md e os arquivos complementares exibidos pelo SkillsMP antes de decidir se vai instalar.

Explorador de arquivos
4 arquivos

Exibindo SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instruções da origem · Visualização somente leitura
name
scientific-research-design-method
description
Structure evidence-aware scientific research decisions with competing hypotheses, disconfirming predictions, uncertainty, rigor, feasibility, ethics, safety, and review gates. Use for research scoping, early study concepts, or prioritizing candidate directions without confusing ideas with findings.
# Scientific research design method ## Upstream provenance This is a bounded OpenCorvus adaptation of the individually MIT-licensed `scientific-brainstorming` Skill from [K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills](https://github.com/K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills), pinned to `7eb9c23c32ecf7f8c19cb45ded3150534ccefe6a`. See `references/upstream.md` and `references/upstream-license.txt`. It retains independent idea generation, explicit assumptions, adversarial review, and decision logging while excluding upstream CLIs, cross-Skill dependencies, and field-specific operational instructions. ## Workflow 1. Freeze one research question, decision owner, evidence date, constraints, prohibited outputs, and required institutional reviews. 2. Separate located evidence, ideas, assumptions, predictions, unknowns, and decisions. 3. Generate competing hypotheses independently before discussion or scoring. 4. Record disconfirming observations, alternatives, confounders, information gain, feasibility, and null-result value. 5. Run rigor, ethics, safety, privacy, equity, and dual-use review; a score never overrides a gate. 6. Join into a decision register with dissent, source limits, proposed tests, approvals, and revisit triggers. ## Boundaries - Do not provide patient-specific advice, claim empirical validation, or approve regulated research. - Stop and route harmful, evasive, clinical, biosafety, or controlled work to authorized professionals. - Use `assets/research-decision-register.md` for the final deliverable.
Ver no GitHub