一键导入
math-review
Verifies math-heavy code for algorithmic correctness and numerical stability. Use when reviewing scientific algorithms, ML models, or numerical code.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
菜单
Verifies math-heavy code for algorithmic correctness and numerical stability. Use when reviewing scientific algorithms, ML models, or numerical code.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Detects AI-generated writing patterns in prose. Use when reviewing docs for slop, vague language, or identity leaks before publishing.
Audits Rust code for unsafe blocks, ownership issues, and Cargo dependency risks. Use when reviewing Rust code or before merging Rust changes.
Recommends context compression strategies for bloated or quota-heavy sessions. Use when context feels sluggish or quota burns faster than expected.
Guide minimal code via a decision ladder with full safety, edge, and negative-case coverage. Use when adding code, choosing a dependency, or auditing a diff.
Optimizes context window via MECW principles and memory tiering. Use when context exceeds 30% or before long multi-step tasks.
Generates or remediates documentation with human-quality writing. Use when creating new docs, rewriting AI-generated content, or applying style profiles.
| name | math-review |
| description | Verifies math-heavy code for algorithmic correctness and numerical stability. Use when reviewing scientific algorithms, ML models, or numerical code. |
| alwaysApply | false |
| category | specialized |
| tags | ["math","algorithms","numerical","stability","verification","scientific"] |
| tools | [] |
| usage_patterns | ["algorithm-review","numerical-analysis","derivation-verification","stability-assessment"] |
| complexity | advanced |
| model_hint | deep |
| estimated_tokens | 200 |
| progressive_loading | true |
| dependencies | ["pensive:shared","imbue:proof-of-work","imbue:review-core","imbue:structured-output"] |
Intensive analysis ensuring numerical stability and alignment with standards.
/math-review
Verification: Run the command with --help flag to verify availability.
math-review:context-syncedmath-review:requirements-mappedmath-review:derivations-verifiedmath-review:stability-assessedmath-review:evidence-loggedmath-review:findings-verifiedpwd && git status -sb && git diff --stat origin/main..HEAD
Verification: Run git status to confirm working tree state.
Enumerate math-heavy files (source, tests, docs, notebooks). Classify risk: safety-critical, financial, ML fairness.
Translate requirements → mathematical invariants. Document pre/post conditions, conservation laws, bounds. Load: modules/requirements-mapping.md
Re-derive formulas using CAS. Challenge approximations. Cite authoritative standards (NASA-STD-7009, ASME VVUQ). Load: modules/derivation-verification.md
Evaluate conditioning, precision, scaling, randomness. Compare complexity. Quantify uncertainty. Load: modules/numerical-stability.md
pytest tests/math/ --benchmark
jupyter nbconvert --execute derivation.ipynb
Verification: Run pytest -v tests/math/ to verify.
Log deviations, recommend: Approve / Approve with actions / Block. Load: modules/testing-strategies.md
math-review:findings-verified)Every issue must cite a real location and a verbatim anchor. Write
findings to .review/findings.json and confirm each citation resolves:
python plugins/imbue/scripts/citation_verifier.py \
--findings .review/findings.json --repo-root .
Drop or label UNVERIFIED any finding the verifier fails (exit 1);
only verified findings enter the report. See Skill(imbue:review-core)
Step 5 for the protocol and Skill(imbue:structured-output) for the
finding schema.
Default (200 tokens): Core workflow, checklists +Requirements (+300 tokens): Invariants, pre/post conditions, coverage analysis +Derivation (+350 tokens): CAS verification, standards, citations +Stability (+400 tokens): Numerical properties, precision, complexity +Testing (+350 tokens): Edge cases, benchmarks, reproducibility
Total with all modules: ~1600 tokens
Correctness: Formulas match spec | Edge cases handled | Units consistent | Domain enforced Stability: Condition number OK | Precision sufficient | No cancellation | Overflow prevented Verification: Derivations documented | References cited | Tests cover invariants | Benchmarks reproducible Documentation: Assumptions stated | Limitations documented | Error bounds specified | References linked
## Summary
[Brief findings]
## Context
Files | Risk classification | Standards
## Requirements Analysis
| Invariant | Verified | Evidence |
## Derivation Review
[Status and conflicts]
## Stability Analysis
Condition number | Precision | Risks
## Issues
[M1] [Title]
- Location: file.py:123
- Anchor: `verbatim source text at line 123`
- Issue: [what is wrong] | Fix: [remediation] | Evidence: [E1]
## Recommendation
Approve / Approve with actions / Block
Every issue's Anchor is the exact source text at Location; it is what
citation_verifier.py re-reads to prove the finding is real.
Verification: Run the command with --help flag to verify availability.
Location + verbatim Anchor, and citation_verifier.py confirmed all citations (exit 0) or unverified issues were dropped or labeled UNVERIFIED