backup materials and knowledge-base docs

This commit is contained in:
admin
2026-05-30 16:22:29 +08:00
commit 93e50e8fce
3024 changed files with 2994945 additions and 0 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 1 — Benchmark comparison figure
## User-style prompt
Help me make a publication-quality benchmark comparison figure for six methods across three datasets.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: figure
- maturity: publication-ready generation
- structure: single panel
- goal: fast comparison across methods and datasets
## Preferred route
- primary tool: `pubfig`
- likely family: `grouped_scatter` or `bar_scatter`
- companion table: optional, only if exact values must be preserved nearby
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- explain why the chosen comparison form is better than a raw grouped bar if density is high
- provide a minimal `pubfig` implementation
- provide one explicit export command/path such as `benchmark.pdf`
- provide a short QA note about readability, legend density, and category ordering

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 2 — Ablation figure
## User-style prompt
Turn these ablation results into a paper-ready figure that makes the contribution of each module easy to read.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: figure
- maturity: publication-ready generation
- structure: single panel or compact paired panel
- goal: isolate incremental effect clearly
## Preferred route
- primary tool: `pubfig`
- likely family: `dumbbell` or `paired` for low-cardinality paired ablations, otherwise a compact grouped comparison chart or companion table
- do not default to a crowded decorative chart
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- recommend the ablation-focused visual form and why
- provide runnable `pubfig` code
- export to a paper-ready format
- include a QA note on baseline clarity and ordering

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 3 — Calibration / evaluation figure
## User-style prompt
I need a publication-quality evaluation figure showing whether my predicted probabilities are calibrated.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: figure
- maturity: publication-ready generation
- structure: single panel
- goal: diagnostic evaluation, not generic trend plotting
## Preferred route
- primary tool: `pubfig`
- likely family: `calibration`
- related alternatives: ROC / PR only if the scientific question changes
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- explain why calibration is the right diagnostic form
- provide minimal runnable code
- export to PDF or SVG
- include QA on labels, reference lines, and downscaled readability

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 4 — Forest / diagnostic figure
## User-style prompt
Help me convert these effect estimates and confidence intervals into a paper-quality figure.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: figure
- maturity: publication-ready generation
- structure: single panel
- goal: communicate effect size with uncertainty
## Preferred route
- primary tool: `pubfig`
- likely family: `forest_plot`
- table may accompany it in appendix if exact values are numerous
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- identify forest plot as the default route
- provide the required arrays/arguments shape
- export a paper-ready artifact
- include QA on reference line, label clarity, and ordering

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
# Example 5 — Publication-ready LaTeX table from Excel
## User-style prompt
Convert this Excel benchmark sheet into a publication-ready LaTeX table and give me a preview path before I paste it into the paper.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: table
- maturity: publication-ready generation
- structure: single table
- goal: exact benchmark values in LaTeX
## Preferred route
- primary tool: `pubtab`
- likely route: `xlsx2tex` + `preview`
- for a robust preview-first workflow, preview the table body first and keep final caption/label handling as a separate manuscript-facing step when needed
- `tabularray` only if the manuscript/backend requires it
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- provide the exact `pubtab` command or Python route
- include caption/label guidance when appropriate, but do not force them into the preview-first route
- include preview generation
- mention table width/span concerns if relevant

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 6 — Mixed figure + table deliverable
## User-style prompt
For this results section, I want one summary figure and one companion table: the figure should show the overall pattern, and the table should preserve the exact metrics.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: mixed deliverable
- maturity: publication-ready generation
- structure: one figure plus one table
- goal: split visual summary from exact evidence
## Preferred route
- figure: `pubfig`
- table: `pubtab`
- each artifact should have a distinct communication role
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- explicitly separate figure and table responsibilities
- provide one minimal `pubfig` route and one minimal `pubtab` route
- define export filenames for both
- include QA on redundancy and role separation

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 7 — Revision from a weak chart request
## User-style prompt
I was thinking of using a radar chart for these benchmark results. Can you improve this into something publication-quality?
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: revision task
- maturity: review/revision
- structure: likely single figure or figure+table alternative
- goal: replace a weak chart choice with a stronger one
## Preferred route
- review the proposed radar choice critically
- recommend a stronger alternative such as grouped scatter, line, or a table depending on the claim
- only keep radar if the profile comparison is genuinely the right representation
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- explain why the original chart is weak or risky
- recommend a better artifact type
- provide the replacement implementation route
- include targeted QA / revision notes, not vague style comments

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Example 8 — Review an existing figure or table draft
## User-style prompt
Here is my current results figure screenshot and the draft benchmark table. Please tell me what is weak, whether the figure should stay a figure or become a figure + table pair, and give me the recommended pubfig/pubtab revision path.
## Expected skill interpretation
- artifact: review / revision
- maturity: existing deliverable upgrade
- structure: figure-only or figure + companion table
- goal: keep the strongest communication role for each artifact instead of polishing a weak form blindly
## Preferred route
- inspect the current figure/table role split first
- recommend whether the figure should stay visual and the table should preserve exact values
- use `pubfig` for the figure revision and `pubtab` for the table revision when both are needed
## Minimum acceptable output shape
- identify the concrete publication weaknesses in the current artifact(s)
- say whether the final deliverable should be figure-only, table-only, or figure + table
- provide one runnable `pubfig` and/or `pubtab` revision route
- define explicit export filenames and a short QA checklist