Scientific Critical Thinking
Skill Verifiziert AktivEvaluate scientific claims and evidence quality. Use for assessing experimental design validity, identifying biases and confounders, applying evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane Risk of Bias), or teaching critical analysis. Best for understanding evidence quality, identifying flaws. For formal peer review writing use peer-review.
To empower AI agents to critically evaluate scientific claims and evidence, identify research flaws, and assess the quality and validity of scientific studies.
Funktionen
- Evaluate scientific claims and evidence quality
- Assess experimental design validity
- Identify biases and confounders
- Apply evidence grading frameworks (GRADE, Cochrane)
- Teach critical analysis of research
Anwendungsfälle
- Evaluating research methodology and experimental design
- Assessing statistical validity and evidence quality
- Identifying biases and confounding in studies
- Reviewing scientific claims and conclusions
Nicht-Ziele
- Performing formal peer review writing (suggests using 'peer-review' skill)
- Generating scientific papers (focus is on evaluation)
- Executing scientific experiments directly (focus is on analysis of claims)
Workflow
- User prompts skill to evaluate a scientific claim or study.
- Skill analyzes the claim/study based on provided information and bundled references.
- Skill identifies methodological flaws, biases, statistical issues, or logical fallacies.
- Skill assesses evidence quality using frameworks like GRADE or Cochrane.
- Skill provides a structured critique, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and evidence for/against the claim.
Installation
npx skills add K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-skillsFührt das Vercel skills CLI (skills.sh) via npx aus — benötigt Node.js lokal und mindestens einen installierten skills-kompatiblen Agent (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, …). Setzt voraus, dass das Repo dem agentskills.io-Format folgt.
Qualitätspunktzahl
VerifiziertVertrauenssignale
Ähnliche Erweiterungen
Problem Solving
100Apply systematic problem-solving techniques when stuck. Use for complexity spirals, innovation blocks, recurring patterns, assumption constraints, simplification cascades, scale uncertainty.
Scientific Peer Review
99Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation. Use when writing formal peer reviews with specific criteria methodology assessment, statistical validity, reporting standards compliance (CONSORT/STROBE), and constructive feedback. Best for actual review writing, manuscript revision. For evaluating claims/evidence quality use scientific-critical-thinking; for quantitative scoring frameworks use scholar-evaluation.
Argumentation
98Construct well-structured arguments using the hypothesis-argument-example triad. Covers formulating falsifiable hypotheses, building logical arguments (deductive, inductive, analogical, evidential), providing concrete examples, and steelmanning counterarguments. Use when writing or reviewing PR descriptions that propose technical changes, justifying design decisions in ADRs, constructing substantive code review feedback, or building a research argument or technical proposal.
Consciousness Council
97Run a multi-perspective Mind Council deliberation on any question, decision, or creative challenge. Use this skill whenever the user wants diverse viewpoints, needs help making a tough decision, asks for a council/panel/board discussion, wants to explore a problem from multiple angles, requests devil's advocate analysis, or says things like "what would different experts think about this", "help me think through this from all sides", "council mode", "mind council", or "deliberate on this". Also trigger when the user faces a dilemma, trade-off, or complex choice with no obvious answer.
The Fool
95Use when challenging ideas, plans, decisions, or proposals using structured critical reasoning. Invoke to play devil's advocate, run a pre-mortem, red team, or audit evidence and assumptions.
AlterLab Mixed Methods Research
79Mixed methods research design and integration strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Use when planning convergent, explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential, embedded, transformative, or multiphase designs; when integrating diverse data sources through merging, connecting, or embedding; when constructing joint displays or meta-inferences; or when evaluating quality criteria specific to mixed methods research. Covers Creswell & Plano Clark frameworks, notation systems, and software tools for integration. Part of the AlterLab Academic Skills suite.