pattern-recognition
Skill8 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
Master pattern recognition - identify recurring themes, outliers, trends, inconsistencies across documents and data. Use for extracting meaningful patterns from interviews, feedback, and data sets.
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- komluk/scaffoldingtheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
- xiejianjun000/FlowWikitheir own version, first seen Jul 27, 2026
- rudraksha132/pattern-recognitiontheir own version, first seen Jul 19, 2026
- VAMFI/claude-user-memorytheir own version, first seen Nov 23, 2025
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 4
- VAMFI/claude-user-memory★ 206same name
- komluk/scaffolding★ 16same name
- xiejianjun000/FlowWiki★ 4same name
- rudraksha132/pattern-recognition★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository12 other files it gives its agents.
- assumption-validationSkill
- business-fundamentalsSkill
- communicationSkill
- compliance-riskSkill
- critical-thinkingSkill
- data-analysisSkill
- doc-synthesisSkill
- insight-extractionSkill
- market-dynamicsSkill
- stakeholder-managementSkill
- technical-basicsSkill
- user-psychologySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 181
Do two things happen together?
- Distinctive: line 200
Use patterns to trace to cause.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Pattern Recognition for BA
What do the numbers show? What's really happening?
What is Pattern Recognition?
Definition: Identifying recurring themes, anomalies, and trends across data sets, interviews, or documents - finding the signal in noise.
Why it matters:
- Hidden patterns: One-off observation vs actual trend
- Outlier detection: Which observations are unusual/important?
- Data-driven insights: "Many users said it" vs "A few users said it"
- Contradiction detection: "Users love feature X" but "Nobody uses feature X"
- Trend identification: Direction of change (improving/declining)
When to Use:
- ✅ Analyzing 5-8 user interviews (find common themes)
- ✅ Reviewing customer feedback (what's most mentioned?)
- ✅ Analyzing data sets (what's the trend?)
- ✅ Finding inconsistencies (why do findings conflict?)
- ✅ Identifying root causes (what's the common factor?)
3 Pattern Types
Type 1: Frequency Patterns (The 60% Rule)
What appeared in 60%+ of observations?
Interview Finding: "Users find setup confusing"
Count appearances:
Interview 1: User said "setup confusing" ✓
Interview 2: User said "takes too long" ✓
Interview 3: User said "confusing" ✓
Interview 4: User completed easily ✗
Interview 5: User said "confusing" ✓
Interview 6: User said "unclear" ✓
Interview 7: User completed in 5 min ✗
Interview 8: User said "complex" ✓
Count: 6 out of 8 mentioned confusion = 75%
→ PATTERN FOUND (60%+ threshold)
Conclusion: Setup confusion is widespread issue,
not just one user's problemType 2: Contradiction Patterns
What conflicts with other observations?
Observation 1: "Users love the dashboard feature"
- Quote 1: "Dashboard gives me visibility I need"
- Quote 2: "Dashboard is my favorite feature"
But Data Shows: Dashboard usage is only 15% of users
80% never open dashboard
CONTRADICTION FOUND!
→ Investigation: Maybe users love it when they use it,
but most don't discover it or use it
(awareness/discoverability problem, not feature problem)Type 3: Outlier Patterns
What's unusual or stands out?
Sales Data:
- Sales rep A: $500K revenue (typical)
- Sales rep B: $520K revenue (typical)
- Sales rep C: $850K revenue (outlier - 60% higher!)
- Sales rep D: $480K revenue (typical)
Question: Why is Sales rep C so much higher?
Investigation:
→ Rep C focuses on Enterprise segment (higher deal size)
→ Other reps focus on SMB (smaller deals)
Insight: Enterprise segment is 60% higher value
→ Strategy implication: Shift towards Enterprise focus?5 Pattern Recognition Techniques
1. Frequency Analysis
Count how many times something appears.
Process:
1. Review all interviews/data
2. Mark each instance of observation
3. Count total instances
4. Divide by total observations
5. Calculate percentage
Rules:
- Pattern threshold: 60%+ = significant pattern
- 30-60% = interesting trend, but not consensus
- <30% = minority view, document but don't prioritize
Example:
Pain point: "No real-time collaboration"
User 1: Mentioned ✓
User 2: Mentioned ✓
User 3: Mentioned ✓
User 4: Not mentioned ✗
User 5: Mentioned ✓
User 6: Mentioned ✓
5 of 6 mentioned = 83% → STRONG PATTERN2. Segmentation Analysis
Does pattern appear in specific segments?
Finding: "Users frustrated with performance"
Segment analysis:
- Enterprise users: 80% frustrated with performance
- Mid-market users: 40% frustrated with performance
- SMB users: 20% frustrated with performance
Insight: Performance is enterprise problem primarily
Not universal issue, segment-specific
→ Design: Enterprise scalability first, SMB later3. Timeline Analysis
Does pattern change over time?
User churn by cohort:
Cohort A (Jan 2026): 5% monthly churn
Cohort B (Feb 2026): 6% monthly churn
Cohort C (Mar 2026): 12% monthly churn
Cohort D (Apr 2026): 15% monthly churn
Trend: Churn increasing for newer cohorts
→ Insight: Something is getting worse (product, onboarding, market fit)
→ Action: Investigate what changed4. Correlation Analysis
Do two things happen together?
Observation: Users with low onboarding completion have high churn
Data:
Users completing <3 steps: 70% churn
Users completing 3-5 steps: 40% churn
Users completing all steps: 5% churn
Correlation Found: Onboarding completion → Churn reduction
→ Insight: Completing onboarding indicates product fit
→ Action: Make onboarding better to improve retention5. Root Cause Analysis via Patterns
Use patterns to trace to cause.
Pattern: "Users abandon at step 3"
Investigation:
Interview review: 6 of 8 users mentioned "password step"
→ Deeper: When asked why, got:
- "Requirements unclear"
- "Password validation error"
- "Confusing message"
Pattern: All mention password step
All have confusion/clarity issues
→ ROOT CAUSE: Password UX is broken
→ Solution: Redesign password step for clarityCommon Pattern Analysis Mistakes
❌ Small Sample Size
Problem: "All 2 users said feature X is broken"
Issue: 2 users is too small, could be coincidence
Fix: Need 5-8 observations minimum to establish pattern❌ Confirmation Bias
Problem: "I expected users to want feature A, so I count evidence
supporting A and ignore evidence for B"
Fix: Count ALL observations objectively, not just ones you expected❌ Selection Bias
Problem: "Interviewed only early adopters, they love feature"
Issue: Early adopters ≠ typical users, they have different needs
Fix: Interview diverse user segments❌ Mixing Unrelated Observations
Problem: "Users mentioned: slow performance, confusing UI, needs
integration, wants mobile. These are 4 separate issues."
Issue: Looking like one big pattern when they're separate
Fix: Categorize observations into distinct patternsPattern Recognition Workflow
Step 1: Prepare Data
- Gather all observations (interviews, feedback, metrics)
- Organize in consistent format
- Ensure sample size adequate (5-8+ minimum)
Step 2: Code Observations
- Read each observation
- Identify key themes/topics
- Label/tag by theme
- Note exact quote/evidence
Step 3: Tabulate
- Count frequency by theme
- Calculate percentages
- Identify patterns (60%+ threshold)
- Spot contradictions
Step 4: Investigate
- For each pattern, ask "Why?"
- Look for sub-patterns (is it segment-specific?)
- Compare with other data (does it correlate?)
- Identify root causes
Step 5: Document
- List patterns found
- Evidence for each (quotes, percentages)
- Implications/recommendations
- Remaining questions
Tools & Templates
- 📋 Pattern Analysis Template:
assets/pattern-analysis-template.md - 📋 Frequency Counting Worksheet:
assets/frequency-template.md - 📋 Coding Framework:
assets/coding-framework-template.md - 📋 Trend Analysis Template:
assets/trend-analysis-template.md - 📋 Contradiction Assessment:
assets/contradiction-template.md
Usage Examples
/pattern-recognition "interview-transcripts" "Common pain points?"
/pattern-recognition "customer-feedback-data" "Recurring complaints?"
/pattern-recognition "usage-metrics" "What features get used most?"BA Standards & References
Based on:
- Qualitative Analysis: Coding and theme identification
- Quantitative Analysis: Frequency and correlation
- Data Science: Pattern detection, outlier analysis
- User Research: Thematic analysis methodology
Detailed Frameworks:
- 📚
references/frequency-analysis.md- Counting and the 60% rule - 📚
references/coding-framework.md- How to code observations - 📚
references/theme-identification.md- Finding main themes - 📚
references/outlier-detection.md- Finding and investigating anomalies - 📚
references/correlation-causation.md- When patterns are related vs coincidence
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

