ai-research-reproduction

作成者: lllllllama

RigorPilotの再現モードオーケストレーター。READMEファーストの深層学習リポジトリ再現用。ユーザーがエンドツーエンドで最小限の信頼性のあるフローを求める場合に使用。リポジトリを最初に読み、最小の文書化された推論または評価ターゲットを選択し、取り込み、セットアップ、信頼できる実行、オプションの信頼できるトレーニング、オプションのリポジトリ分析、オプションの論文ギャップ解決を調整し、保守的なパッチルールを適用し、証拠の前提の逸脱と人間の判断ポイントを記録する。

npx skills add https://github.com/lllllllama/rigorpilot-skills --skill ai-research-reproduction

ai-research-reproduction

Purpose

Use this as the Rigor Reproduce compatible skill slug for README-first deep learning repository reproduction. The installed slug remains ai-research-reproduction for compatibility. The skill guides the agent toward a minimal trustworthy run with auditable evidence; it should not micromanage implementation details that the model can infer from the repository. Reproduction is not "make it run by changing anything"; it means faithfully reading the README, environment, weights, datasets, and documented commands, then recording results and deviations.

Start from the shared operating principles in ../../references/agent-operating-principles.md, then load ../../references/research-rigor-principles.md and ../../references/deep-learning-experiment-principles.md when scientific meaning, comparability, or experiment details are at stake.

Fit

Use this skill when all are true:

  • The target is an AI code repository with a README, scripts, configs, or documented commands.
  • The request spans multiple trusted phases such as intake, setup, execution, training verification, analysis, paper-gap resolution, and reporting.
  • The desired result is a small reproducible target, not broad experimentation.

Do not use this skill for paper summaries, generic environment setup, isolated repo scanning, standalone command execution, open-ended research design, or explicit candidate-only exploration.

Trusted Target Selection

Choose the smallest target that can honestly demonstrate repository-grounded reproduction:

  1. documented inference
  2. documented evaluation
  3. documented training startup or partial verification
  4. full training only after explicit user confirmation

Treat README guidance as the primary reproduction intent. Use repository files to clarify the README, not to silently replace it. When the README and paper conflict, record the conflict and use paper-context-resolver only for the narrow reproduction-critical gap.

Workflow

  1. Read the README and nearby repo signals.
  2. Use repo-intake-and-plan to extract documented commands and candidate targets.
  3. Select and justify the minimum trustworthy target.
  4. Use env-and-assets-bootstrap only for target-specific environment, checkpoint, dataset, and cache assumptions.
  5. Use analyze-project only when structure, insertion points, or suspicious implementation patterns need read-only clarification.
  6. Use minimal-run-and-audit for documented inference, evaluation, smoke, or sanity execution.
  7. Use run-train instead when the selected trusted target is training startup, short-run verification, full kickoff, or resume.
  8. Pause for human review before fuller training claims or any change that could alter dataset, split, checkpoint, preprocessing, metric, loss, model semantics, or result interpretation.
  9. Write the standardized outputs and give a concise final note in the user's language when practical.

Patch Boundary

Prefer no repository edits. If edits are needed, keep them conservative and auditable:

  • Try command-line arguments, environment variables, path fixes, dependency version fixes, or dependency-file fixes before code changes.
  • Reproduction fixes are allowed when needed, but they must not be hidden. State what changed, why it was necessary, whether it changes scientific meaning, and whether it affects comparability with the paper, README, or baseline.
  • Avoid changing model architecture, core inference semantics, training logic, loss functions, or experiment meaning.
  • If repository files must change, create a branch named repro/YYYY-MM-DD-short-task, keep verified patch commits sparse, and record README-fidelity impact in PATCHES.md.

See references/patch-policy.md.

Outputs

Always target repro_outputs/:

SUMMARY.md
COMMANDS.md
LOG.md
SCIENTIFIC_CHANGELOG.md
COMPARABILITY_REPORT.md
status.json
ANNOTATED_README.md   # original README + colored per-section agent-action annotations
PATCHES.md   # only if patches were applied

Use the templates under assets/ and the field rules in references/output-spec.md.

  • Put the shortest high-value summary in SUMMARY.md.
  • Put copyable commands in COMMANDS.md.
  • Put process evidence, assumptions, failures, and decisions in LOG.md.
  • Put scientific meaning and change effects in SCIENTIFIC_CHANGELOG.md.
  • Put comparison anchors and protocol deviations in COMPARABILITY_REPORT.md.
  • Put durable machine-readable state in status.json.
  • Put branch, commit, validation, and README-fidelity impact in PATCHES.md when needed.
  • Put the researcher's at-a-glance view in ANNOTATED_README.md: the README replayed verbatim, each section annotated in color with what the agent did there, linked to the evidence files above.
  • Distinguish verified facts from inferred guesses.

Reference Loading

  • Load references/language-policy.md when writing human-readable outputs.
  • Load ../../references/research-rigor-principles.md before making comparability, contribution, or research-result claims.
  • Load ../../references/deep-learning-experiment-principles.md when dataset, split, metric, checkpoint, training, or evaluation details matter.
  • Consult ~/.rigorpilot/PERSONAL_RIGOR.md if present, under ../../references/continuous-learning-policy.md (advisory only; core wins).
  • Failed and later-resolved runs are auto-recorded as lessons via shared/scripts/lessons_store.py (RIGORPILOT_LESSONS=0 disables).
  • Load references/research-safety-principles.md before protocol-sensitive decisions.
  • Load references/patch-policy.md before modifying repository files.
  • Keep specialized logic in sub-skills, scripts, templates, or references rather than expanding this entrypoint.

lllllllamaのその他のスキル

ai-research-explore
lllllllama
Rigor Explore互
researchdata-analysisapi
analyze-project
lllllllama
Rigor Analyze / Rigor Auditの読み取り専用スキル。深層学習研究リポジトリ向け。ユーザーがリポジトリを読み解き、モデル構造や学習・推論のエントリポイントを調査し、設定や挿入箇所を確認し、コードを変更したり重いジョブを実行せずに不審な実装パターンを指摘したい場合に使用する。アクティブなコマンド実行、大規模なリファクタリング、推測的なコード適応、自動バグ修正には使用しない。
developmentcode-reviewresearch
explore-code
lllllllama
We need to translate the given English text into Japanese, preserving the name "explore-code" if it appears. The text is a description of a skill. The instruction says: "Translate only the text inside <text>. Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." The name "explore-code" does not appear in the source text? Actually, the source text starts with "Rigor Improve implementation leaf skill for auditable candidate implementation..." There is no "explore-code" in the text. The directory item type is "agent skill" and the name is "explore-code", but the instruction says not to include the name unless it appears in the source text. So we just translate the given paragraph. We need to preserve technical terms like "LoRA", "adapter layers", "backbone", "head", "rollback-aware records", "explore_outputs/", "current_research". Also preserve URLs, numbers, etc. No extra commentary. Let's translate carefully. Original: "Rigor Improve implementation leaf skill for auditable candidate implementation
developmentresearchcode-review
minimal-run-and-audit
lllllllama
We need to translate the given English text into Japanese, preserving the name "minimal-run-and-audit" if it appears. The text is a description of a skill. The instruction says: "Translate only the text inside <text>. Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." The name "minimal-run-and-audit" does not appear in the source text. So we just translate the description. Also preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, technical terms. The text includes "Rigor Run skill", "README-first deep learning repo reproduction", "smoke test", "documented inference or evaluation command", "repro_outputs/", "patch notes", etc. We need to translate naturally into Japanese while keeping those terms as is or with appropriate Japanese equivalents? The instruction says "preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, and technical terms." So "Rigor Run skill" might be a product name? It says "Rigor Run skill" - likely a proper name. Keep as is. "README-first
developmenttestingcode-review
env-and-assets-bootstrap
lllllllama
README優先の深層学習リポジトリ再現のためのRigor Setupスキル。READMEにドキュメント化されたリポジトリで実行前に、保守的なconda優先環境、チェックポイントとデータセットのパス前提、キャッシュ場所のヒント、セットアップノートを準備するタスクに使用する。リポジトリスキャン、完全なオーケストレーション、論文解釈、最終実行レポート、特定の再現対象に紐づかない汎用的な環境セットアップには使用しない。
developmentdevops
explore-run
lllllllama
Rigor Improve / Rigor Explore の探索実行リーフスキル。深層学習研究リポジトリにおける限定的な探索的証拠のために使用する。研究者が明示的に探索的実行(小サブセット検証、短期間の推測と確認、バッチス
researchdevelopmentdata-analysis
safe-debug
lllllllama
ディープラーニング研究作業のためのRigor Debug / Rigor Auditスキル。ユーザーがトレースバック、ターミナルエラー、CUDA OOM、チェックポイント読み込み失敗、形状不一致、NaN損失症状、またはトレーニング失敗を貼り付け、パッチ適用前に保守的な診断を希望し、デバッグ修正が研究貢献と明確に分離されている場合に使用します。広範なリファクタリング、推測的な適応、自動探索的パッチ適用、または一般的なリポジトリの習熟には使用しないでください。
developmenttestingcode-review
paper-context-resolver
lllllllama
README優先の深層学習リポジトリ再現のための厳密な論文コンテキストヘルパー。READMEやリポジトリファイルに再現に重要な狭いギャップがあり、データセット分割、前処理、評価プロトコル、チェックポイントマッピング、実行時仮定など、特定の論文詳細を一次論文ソースから解決し、矛盾を記録するタスクの場合のみ使用。一般的な論文要約、リポジトリスキャン、環境設定、コマンド実行、タイトルだけの論文検索などには使用しないでください。
researchdocumentdata-analysis