ai-research-reproduction

Orquestrador do modo de reprodução do RigorPilot para reprodução de repositórios de aprendizado profundo com foco em README. Use quando o usuário desejar um fluxo completo e de confiança mínima que primeiro leia o repositório, selecione o menor alvo de inferência ou avaliação documentado, coordene a ingestão, configuração, execução confiável, treinamento confiável opcional, análise opcional do repositório e resolução opcional de lacunas do artigo, aplique regras conservadoras de correção, registre evidências, suposições, desvios e pontos de decisão humana,...

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

ai-research-reproduction

Purpose

Guide README-first deep learning reproduction toward the smallest trustworthy run with auditable evidence. Preserve documented meaning; record assumptions, deviations and blockers instead of changing semantics to manufacture success. Load specialized references only for a concrete uncertainty.

Fast Path

For a routine bounded run, keep the control path short:

  1. Read the target README and only the target test/config/source needed to understand the documented command.
  2. Run scripts/orchestrate_repro.py --repo <repo> --plan-only --agent-output with any explicit user timeout bound (--timeout or --train-timeout) already supplied; review command_candidates, the selected cmd-XX, side-effect contract, selection fingerprint, and returned reviewed_run_args. With no --output-dir, later evidence goes to <repo>/repro_outputs regardless of caller cwd.
  3. Run the selected candidate, or another reviewed candidate, with --run-selected --command-id <cmd-XX> --plan-fingerprint <fingerprint> --agent-output plus requested timeout/metric/source-adjacent options. Preserve an explicit user command-timeout bound instead of silently making it stricter on a routine trusted run. --timeout limits the target command; do not wrap the whole orchestrator in an equal or shorter external timeout, because it still needs time to terminate children and write terminal evidence. A changed command set fails closed; setup/download commands are never target candidates.
  4. Run --verify-output --agent-output; inspect detailed evidence files only when verification fails or the result is partial/blocked.
  5. Deliver the bounded result and stop.

For a host with short tool-call deadlines, rerun planning with --include-agent-handoff and follow references/agent-job.md; otherwise keep the direct path above. Job completion is not task acceptance, and uncertain state is never a reason for automatic replay.

Do not inspect orchestrate_repro.py, annotate_readme.py, _bundled/, writers, or runtime internals on a normal success path. Inspect implementation only for a concrete blocker, unexpected side effect, bundle-integrity failure, or unresolved safety question. Use scripts/doctor.py for first-use environment/install diagnostics. Executed commands keep full lifecycle/log evidence under repro_outputs/_runtime/<run_id>/.

Fit

Use this skill for repository-grounded, multi-phase trusted reproduction where the goal is a small reproducible target. Do not use it for paper summaries, generic setup, isolated scanning, standalone commands, open-ended research design, or explicitly authorized candidate 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. Treat README guidance as primary; extract and select the minimum trustworthy target.
  2. Use setup/assets only for target-specific prerequisites and analyze-project only when structural clarification is needed.
  3. Use minimal-run-and-audit for inference/evaluation/smoke and run-train for training startup, kickoff, or resume; direct execution is the default.
  4. Pause before fuller training or changes to dataset, split, checkpoint, preprocessing, metric, loss, model semantics, or interpretation.
  5. Award result-match only against explicit expected metrics and tolerance; process success alone is not reproduction success.
  6. Write the evidence bundle, return the requested bounded result, and stop; optional stages are not automatic follow-up work.

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 references/output-spec.md. Keep summaries short, commands copyable, machine state stable, and scientific/comparability changes explicit. ANNOTATED_README.md must preserve the source README byte-for-byte outside inserted evidence blocks and pass its strip/check round trip. Use --source-adjacent-readme only for an owned RIGORPILOT_README.md; never replace an unrelated file. Distinguish verified facts from inference.

Reference Loading

  • Workflow judgment: references/agent-operating-principles.md.
  • Human-readable output: references/language-policy.md.
  • Scientific/comparability judgment: references/research-rigor-principles.md and, when experiment details matter, references/deep-learning-experiment-principles.md.
  • Protocol-sensitive changes: references/research-safety-principles.md and references/patch-policy.md.
  • Personal rigor and lessons are advisory only; keep specialized detail in references/scripts rather than expanding this entrypoint.

Mais skills de lllllllama

ai-research-explore
lllllllama
We need to translate the given text from English to Brazilian Portuguese. The text describes a skill for deep learning research exploration. We must preserve the name "ai-research-explore" if it appears, but it does not appear in the text. The text includes technical terms like "Rigor Explore", "SOTA", "README-first", etc. We should keep those as is or translate appropriately? The instruction says preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, and technical terms. "Rigor Explore" might be a product name? It's capitalized. "SOTA" is an acronym for state-of-the-art, often kept as is. "README-first" is a term. "explore_outputs/" is a path. We should keep those. Also "current_research" is a variable or term. Keep as is. We need to translate the rest naturally. The text: "Rigor Explore compatible skill slug for meaningful and potentially novel deep learning research candidates. Use when the researcher has chosen the task family, dataset, benchmark, evaluation method, provided SOTA references,
researchdata-analysisapi
analyze-project
lllllllama
Habilidade somente leitura do Rigor Analyze / Rigor Audit para repositórios de pesquisa em deep learning. Use quando o usuário quiser ler e entender um repositório, inspecionar a estrutura do modelo e pontos de entrada de treinamento ou inferência, revisar configurações e pontos de inserção, ou sinalizar padrões de implementação suspeitos sem modificar código ou executar tarefas pesadas. Não use para execução ativa de comandos, refatoração ampla, adaptação especulativa de código ou correção automática de bugs.
developmentcode-reviewresearch
explore-code
lllllllama
We need to translate the given text from English to Brazilian Portuguese. The text is a description of an agent skill called "explore-code". The instruction says to preserve the name "explore-code" only if it appears in the source text. It does appear in the source text? Let's check: The source text has "explore-code" in the first line? Actually, the source text starts with "Rigor Improve implementation leaf skill for auditable candidate implementation..." There is no "explore-code" in the provided text. The name is given in the context but not inside the <text> tags. So we should not include it. The instruction says: "Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." It does not appear. So we just translate the text. Also, preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, technical terms. So "LoRA", "adapter layers", "rollback-aware records", "explore_outputs/", "current_research" should be kept as is or translated? Technical terms like "LoRA
developmentresearchcode-review
minimal-run-and-audit
lllllllama
We need to translate the given text from English to Brazilian Portuguese. The text describes a skill called "minimal-run-and-audit" but the name is not to be included unless it appears in the source text. The source text does not include the name "minimal-run-and-audit" inside the <text> tags. The text starts with "Rigor Run skill for README-first deep learning repo reproduction." So we translate that. Important: Preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, technical terms. So "Rigor Run", "README-first", "deep learning", "repro_outputs/", "patch notes", etc. should remain as is or translated if they are common terms? "deep learning" is often kept as is in Portuguese, but can be translated as "aprendizado profundo". However, the instruction says preserve technical terms. I think "deep learning" is a technical term, so keep it. "README-first" is a concept, maybe keep as is. "Rigor Run" is a skill name? It says
developmenttestingcode-review
env-and-assets-bootstrap
lllllllama
Habilidade de configuração rigorosa para reprodução de repositório de deep learning com foco em README. Use quando a tarefa for especificamente preparar um ambiente conservador baseado em conda, suposições de caminhos de checkpoint e dataset, dicas de localização de cache e notas de configuração antes de qualquer execução em um repositório documentado por README. Não use para varredura de repositório, orquestração completa, interpretação de artigo, relatório final de execução ou configuração genérica de ambiente que não esteja vinculada a um alvo de reprodução específico.
developmentdevops
explore-run
lllllllama
We need to translate the given text from English to Brazilian Portuguese. The text describes a skill called "explore-run" but the instruction says to preserve the name if it appears in the source text. The name "explore-run" appears in the text? Actually, the text says "Rigor Improve / Rigor Explore run leaf skill" - the name is "explore-run" but it's not explicitly written as "explore-run" in the text. The instruction says "Name to preserve: explore-run" but the source text has "Rigor Explore run leaf skill". Possibly the name is embedded. However, the instruction says "Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." The name "explore-run" does not appear literally; it appears as "Explore run" (two words). But the instruction says to preserve the name, so we should keep "explore-run" if it appears? It doesn't. The text has "Rigor Explore run" - that might be the skill name. But the instruction explicitly says "Name to preserve: explore
researchdevelopmentdata-analysis
safe-debug
lllllllama
Habilidade de Debug Rigoroso / Auditoria Rigorosa para trabalhos de pesquisa em aprendizado profundo. Use quando o usuário colar um traceback, erro de terminal, CUDA OOM, falha ao carregar checkpoint, incompatibilidade de forma, sintoma de perda NaN ou falha de treinamento e quiser um diagnóstico conservador antes de qualquer correção, com correções de debug claramente separadas das contribuições de pesquisa. Não use para refatoração ampla, adaptação especulativa, correção exploratória automática ou familiarização geral com o repositório.
developmenttestingcode-review
paper-context-resolver
lllllllama
Auxiliar de contexto do Paper Rigor para reprodução de repositórios de deep learning com foco no README. Use apenas quando o README e os arquivos do repositório deixarem uma lacuna crítica para reprodução e a tarefa for resolver um detalhe específico do artigo, como divisão de dataset, pré-processamento, protocolo de avaliação, mapeamento de checkpoint ou suposição de runtime a partir das fontes primárias do artigo, registrando conflitos. Não use para resumo geral de artigo, varredura de repositório, configuração de ambiente, execução de comandos, consulta apenas por título de artigo ou...
researchdocumentdata-analysis