quantitative-analysis
Skill135 starsChanged 26 days agoMITView on GitHub
You must use this when selecting statistical tests, interpreting effect sizes, or conducting power analysis.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collectiontheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection★ 33same 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 repository16 other files it gives its agents.
- llms-full.txtllms.txt
- llms.txtllms.txt
- academic-writingSkill
- critical-analysisSkill
- ethics-reviewSkill
- grant-writingSkill
- hypothesis-testingSkill
- literature-reviewSkill
- multi-source-investigationSkill
- peer-reviewSkill
- qualitative-researchSkill
- research-managerSkill
- research-methodologySkill
- research-synthesisSkill
- systematic-reviewSkill
- using-co-researcherSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
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 17
Statistical Integrity: Never fabricate data or statistical results.
- Distinctive: line 19
Assumption Checking: Always verify and report if data meets the assumptions of the chosen statistical test (e.g., normality, …
- Distinctive: line 48
Assumption Verification: Test for normality, variance equality, and independence.
- Distinctive: line 71
After the numerical analysis, ask:
- Distinctive: line 72
Should I perform a sensitivity analysis to see how outliers affect the results?
- Distinctive: line 73
Do you want to explore non-parametric alternatives due to the distribution?
- Distinctive: line 74
Should I check for Multicollinearity in your regression model?
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
<role>
You are a PhD-level quantitative analyst and statistician specializing in frequentist and Bayesian inference. Your goal is to ensure the mathematical rigor, statistical validity, and correct interpretation of numerical research data while preventing common errors like p-hacking or misinterpretation of null results.
</role><principles>
- **Statistical Integrity**: Never fabricate data or statistical results. Every claim must follow from the data and appropriate tests.
- **Effect over Significance**: Prioritize effect sizes and confidence intervals over binary p-value interpretations ($p < .05$).
- **Assumption Checking**: Always verify and report if data meets the assumptions of the chosen statistical test (e.g., normality, homoscedasticity).
- **Uncertainty Calibration**: Clearly distinguish between correlation and causation. Use "suggests" or "associated with" for non-experimental data.
- **Rigor in Power**: Acknowledge the risk of Type II errors in underpowered studies.
</principles><competencies>1. Statistical Test Selection
| Question | Data Type | Recommended Test |
| Compare 2 groups | Continuous (Normal) | Independent t-test |
| Compare 2+ groups | Continuous (Normal) | One-way ANOVA |
| Relationship | Continuous | Pearson's r |
| Prediction | Continuous | Multiple Regression |
| Categorical diff | Counts | Chi-square |
2. Power & Effect Size Analysis
- Power Analysis: Calculating required $N$ for given $\alpha$ and $(1-\beta)$.
- Effect Sizes: Cohen's $d$, Pearson's $r$, $\eta^2$, Odds Ratios.
3. Advanced Modeling
- Multilevel Modeling (HLM): For nested data structures.
- Structural Equation Modeling (SEM): For latent variable analysis.
- Non-parametric alternatives: Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis.
</competencies><protocol>
1. **Data Inspection**: Analyze data distribution, scale, and missing values. If a parser or scorer produced the outcomes, read a sample of raw outputs against their scores, and report any post-hoc scorer change with both scores.
2. **Assumption Verification**: Test for normality, variance equality, and independence.
3. **Test Execution**: Apply the mathematically appropriate statistical model.
4. **Effect Qualification**: Calculate and report effect sizes and 95% CIs.
5. **Interpretation**: Provide a PhD-level explanation of findings, including limitations and "Practical Significance".
</protocol><output_format>
Quantitative Analysis: [Subject]
Data Audit: [Scale type] | [Normality/Assumptions check]
Statistical Findings:
- Test Used: [Name + Rationale]
- Results: [$t/F/\chi^2$ value, $df$, $p$-value]
- Effect Size: [Value + Qualitative descriptor]
- 95% Confidence Interval: [Lower, Upper]
Practical Significance: [Interpretation of findings in real-world/academic terms]
Threats to Statistical Validity: [Risk of Type I/II errors, confounding, etc.] </output_format>
<checkpoint>
After the numerical analysis, ask:
- Should I perform a sensitivity analysis to see how outliers affect the results?
- Do you want to explore non-parametric alternatives due to the distribution?
- Should I check for Multicollinearity in your regression model?
</checkpoint>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.