experiment-audit

Audit experimental artifacts for provenance, normalization, and result integrity.

Updated May 29, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Mang30/myskills --skill experiment-audit-mang30
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: experiment-audit
Source: https://github.com/Mang30/myskills/tree/main/skills/experiment-audit
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Mang30/myskills --skill experiment-audit-mang30

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill reduces the risk of publishing invalid or misleading experimental results by detecting common integrity failures like fake ground truth, self-referential score normalization, phantom/mismatched result claims, and scope overreach.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Cross-model integrity review: The executor gathers only file paths while a separate reviewer model reads everything to judge integrity patterns without the executor participating in verdicts.
  • Integrity checks for fraud and failure modes: Verifies ground-truth provenance, score normalization methodology, existence/consistency of claimed results, dead-code/unused metric functions, and whether evaluation scope matches how the paper describes it.
  • Advisory integration output: Writes both a human-readable report and a machine-readable JSON summary, enabling downstream pipeline steps to tag claims with integrity status.

Quick Start

Use the experiment-audit skill with your experiment directory or results path to generate EXPERIMENT_AUDIT.md and EXPERIMENT_AUDIT.json for an integrity verdict.

Frequently Asked Questions about experiment-audit

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I verify experiment results before publishing research claims?

You can verify experiment results by auditing experimental artifacts to validate ground-truth provenance, score normalization, result-file existence, and scope alignment. This generates a structured PASS/WARN/FAIL report and JSON verdict.

How can I detect fraudulent research reporting in machine learning experiments?

Detecting fraudulent research reporting involves checking for fake ground truth, self-referential score normalization, phantom result claims, and dead-code coverage. A cross-model review reads scripts, metrics, and trackers in a read-only sandbox to identify these integrity failures.

What is cross-model review for evaluation audit?

Cross-model evaluation audit separates roles: an executor collects file paths without summarizing, while a separate reviewer model reads files in a read-only sandbox to judge integrity patterns and produce the final verdict.

How do I check if my evaluation scope matches my paper's narrative evidence?

To check evaluation scope alignment, audit your experimental scripts, metrics, trackers, and paper narrative to ensure the evaluation scope matches how the paper describes it. This prevents scope overreach in research claims.

Can I automate experiment integrity checks across multiple scripts and result files?

Yes, you can automate experiment integrity checks by running an audit that validates ground-truth provenance, score normalization, result-file existence, and dead-code coverage across your experiment directory. It outputs both a human-readable report and a machine-readable JSON summary for downstream pipeline integration.