ml-learning-methods
Skill9 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Explain, compare, or choose machine-learning objectives and learning regimes, including masked prediction, self-supervision, generative modeling, reinforcement learning, transfer, and classical methods. Use for ML learning-method questions and training-design tradeoffs; not routine model API usage or infrastructure debugging.
In this repository33 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- agentic-scaffoldingSkill
- annas-archive-ebooksSkill
- ansi-artSkill
- clarifySkill
- conjecture-cascadeSkill
- crystallizeSkill
- dianalokadaSkill
- duris-game-knowledgeSkill
- duris-group-combatSkill
- ebook-extractorSkill
- failure-modesSkill
- gpt-pro-loopSkill
- graph-researcherSkill
- improve-codebaseSkill
- jevSkill
- julian-writingSkill
- kalshi-prediction-marketSkill
- lemmaSkill
- medium-paywall-bypassSkill
- name-reviewSkill
- no-process-pornSkill
- pm-deep-analysisSkill
- pm-market-analysisSkill
- pm-research-methodologiesSkill
- pm-situation-framingSkill
- prediction-drillSkill
- probe-driven-designSkill
- refine-testsSkill
- remove-ai-sinsSkill
- show-usageSkill
- writing-claude-skillsSkill
- x-undocumented-apiSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
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 19
Use the reference chapters to explain mechanisms and make training choices.
- Distinctive: line 43
Avoid common category errors: self-supervised does not mean signal-free.
- Distinctive: line 47
Use available context to establish the output needed, data modality and independence unit, label or reward availability, pretrained assets, …
- Distinctive: line 57
Use the bundled material as a conceptual resource, not a claim that every ML algorithm is covered or that its representative models are the …
≈ “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
ML learning methods
Use the reference chapters to explain mechanisms and make training choices. Start with the relevant chapter; load the full collection only for a broad survey.
Route the question
| Question | Read |
| How do the categories fit together? | Map of learning |
| Cloze tasks, BERT, MAE, masking ratios, or prediction targets | Masked prediction |
| Contrastive learning, collapse, teachers, embeddings, or JEPA | Representation learning |
| Autoregression, VAEs, GANs, diffusion, flows, or masked generation | Generative learning |
| Labels, pseudo-labels, weak supervision, trees, kernels, or clustering | Supervision and classical methods |
| Rewards, imitation, preferences, transfer, LoRA, meta-learning, or forgetting | Decisions and adaptation |
| Bayesian, causal, graph, scientific, federated, or distributed learning | Structured and distributed learning |
| Choosing a method, modality examples, evaluation, or learning exercises | Choosing and evaluating |
| Original papers and research lineage | Sources |
Explain a method
Identify its axis first: supervision source, prediction objective, architecture, optimizer, training stage, deployment setting, or evaluation protocol. Many methods occupy several axes; do not force them into exclusive branches.
Connect the visible input, target, loss, and learned artifact to a concrete example. Then explain what the objective encourages, what information it may discard, suitable uses, failure modes, and the nearest alternative. Add equations when they clarify the mechanism; define their symbols.
Distinguish a model's original training recipe from the broader family. BERT's 15% selection rate and MAE's 75% masking rate are recipe choices, not general laws. Distinguish selected prediction positions, corrupted values, and attention masks.
Avoid common category errors: self-supervised does not mean signal-free; masked reconstruction does not by itself specify a generative sampler; federated does not mean private; DPO does not require an online RL loop; in-context examples do not ordinarily update model weights.
Recommend a method
Use available context to establish the output needed, data modality and independence unit, label or reward availability, pretrained assets, adaptation budget, and inference constraints. State assumptions when a missing constraint changes the recommendation.
Offer the smallest credible baseline and the alternative justified by the bottleneck. Explain why the training signal matches the downstream need, which assumption could fail, and which comparison would change the choice. Do not recommend pretraining from scratch merely because unlabeled data exists.
Compare total costs: obtaining data and labels, training, tuning, adaptation, and serving. Keep reconstruction quality, frozen-feature quality, fine-tuning quality, and sample quality separate. A result on one dataset or compute budget is not a universal ranking.
Use the evidence
The chapters combine sourced mechanisms with explicitly identified practical synthesis. Follow citations for exact recipes or disputed claims. Refresh current model availability, benchmark rankings, and implementation requirements from primary papers or official documentation before recommending a specific current release.
Use the bundled material as a conceptual resource, not a claim that every ML algorithm is covered or that its representative models are the latest. Preserve limitations and identification assumptions when summarizing causal, privacy, uncertainty, and out-of-distribution results.
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.

