gec-data-analysis — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited gec-data-analysis (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
GEC reviewers span disciplines and are demanding about rigor on each tradition's own terms. The analysis must deliver the test the framework (gec-conceptual-framework) and design (gec-research-design) set up, and report it so a reader in another discipline can judge it. This skill covers execution and reporting norms across methods.
gec-submission)stars; the substantive meaning of the estimate for the human/policy question.
(alternative measures, samples, estimators, fixed effects, scale of aggregation), and say what you learn.
region, income); correct for multiple comparisons; avoid mining and post-hoc theorizing.
use small-cluster corrections when clusters are few.
report reliability; show results are not an artifact of a coding/scaling/weighting choice.
trail** from data to interpretation; quote enough to let readers judge.
convergence and divergence — do not report two parallel papers.
renv.lock, requirements.txt, recorded installs).gec-submission).GEC sends papers to reviewers from more than one tradition, so the analysis is judged twice — once for technical correctness and once for whether the human-dimensions claim is earned. Use this as a self-audit before submission.
| Strand | The reviewer's first probe | Pass signal at GEC |
|---|---|---|
| Quantitative | "Is the inference level right, and does the effect mean anything socially?" | Clustered/spatially-corrected SEs plus a sentence translating the coefficient into adaptation, exposure, or equity terms |
| Qualitative | "Can I trace a claim back to the data?" | Visible coding scheme, an evidence trail, and quotes that let the reader adjudicate |
| Mixed methods | "Did the strands actually meet?" | A joint display where convergence and divergence are both interpreted, not two appendices |
| Measurement | "Is the vulnerability/governance index an artifact?" | Reliability reported and the result shown stable to an alternative scaling or weighting |
A global analysis regresses forest-loss rates on a governance-quality index and commodity-price exposure across districts. Numbers are illustrative.
【Main result】magnitude + interval (or qualitative finding) + substantive meaning
【Identification / evidence check】(per research-design) result
【Robustness】specs that could break it → what held
【Heterogeneity】pre-specified? MHT-adjusted?
【Integration】(mixed methods) convergence/divergence interpreted?
【Reproducible】workflow + seeds + pinned versions? [Y/N]
【Next】gec-figures-and-tables../../resources/external_tools.md — estimation, inference, qualitative, and mixed-methods tools../../resources/official-source-map.md — Elsevier research-data policy notes~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.