topology-benchmark-review

Validates persistent-homology results against published benchmarks and project validation tables.

1|Updated Dec 13, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/ZK-Theory/TDL --skill topology-benchmark-review-zk-theory
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: topology-benchmark-review
Source: https://github.com/ZK-Theory/TDL/tree/main/.agents/skills/topology-benchmark-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/ZK-Theory/TDL --skill topology-benchmark-review-zk-theory

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? Persistent-homology pipelines can run end-to-end and produce plausible-looking persistence diagrams that are quantitatively wrong, and internal consistency checks alone will not catch the error. This Skill anchors topological results to external published benchmarks before they are trusted in papers or used as downstream inputs. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Benchmark Anchoring: Compares results against published references such as Gidea-Katz 2017 financial pre-crash L1/L2 norm trends or the project's validate-topology benchmark table. - Diagram Sanity Checks: Verifies off-diagonal features are real rather than numerical noise, H0/H1/H2 counts are plausible, and total persistence scales sensibly with the filtration. - Metric Direction and Replication: Confirms W2/landscape distances move in the expected direction under controlled perturbations and that results reproduce across eras and cohorts. - Use Case: A researcher computes a persistence diagram for a financial time series and needs to confirm the W2 distance trend matches known pre-crash behavior before citing it in a paper. ## Quick Start Review this persistence diagram and Wasserstein distance result against published benchmarks and tell me whether it matches, deviates, or has no available benchmark.

Frequently Asked Questions about topology-benchmark-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I validate a persistence diagram against published benchmarks?

Compare the diagram against a known published result such as Gidea-Katz 2017 for financial pre-crash L1/L2 norm trends, or against the project's validate-topology benchmark table. Report the outcome as MATCHES BENCHMARK, DEVIATES, or NO BENCHMARK AVAILABLE with the discrepancy quantified.

How to check if persistent homology results are correct?

Verify that off-diagonal features are real rather than numerical noise, H0/H1/H2 counts are plausible for the construction, and total persistence scales sensibly with the filtration. Then confirm the result reproduces across eras or cohorts where theory predicts it should.

Why can a persistence diagram look plausible but still be wrong?

A persistent-homology pipeline can run end-to-end without errors while producing quantitatively incorrect output, since internal consistency alone does not catch silent numerical errors. Only comparison against an external published anchor reveals the deviation.

How do I verify Wasserstein distance behaves correctly under perturbation?

Apply a controlled change to the input and check that the W2 or landscape distance increases in the expected direction. If the metric moves the wrong way or stays flat, the computation likely contains an error such as an order or internal_p ambiguity.

When should benchmark review happen in a topology workflow?

Run it after the pipeline produces a result but before the result is used in a paper or fed into downstream analysis. It pairs with the validate-topology sanity checklist and the wasserstein-audit skill for W1/W2 verification.