Skill UI

High-performance Rust toolkit with Python bindings for genomic interval analysis, covering overlap detection, coverage track generation, ML tokenization, reference sequence handling, fragment processing, and scoring workflows for sequencing datasets.

This skill analyzes Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)—such as IP addresses, domains, and file hashes—by querying multiple threat intelligence platforms (VirusTotal, AbuseIPDB, MISP). It determines maliciousness confidence, assigns blocking priorities, and attributes threats to campaigns, crucial for incident response, threat triage, and making informed security decisions.

A comprehensive guide to building an automated Indicator of Compromise (IOC) enrichment pipeline using OpenCTI. This skill teaches how to leverage OpenCTI's native STIX 2.1 model and internal connectors to pull deep context from major external threat intelligence sources like VirusTotal, Shodan, AbuseIPDB, and GreyNoise. The pipeline automatically enriches newly ingested indicators, correlates them with known threat actors and campaigns, and generates confidence scores for rapid analyst prioritization.

Gtars is a robust toolkit providing native Rust implementations and Python bindings for advanced genomic interval modeling. It supports core bioinformatic tasks including set algebra, coverage calculation, tokenization, and fragment processing. The library emphasizes data integrity by enforcing strict genomic data contracts, ensuring correct handling of coordinates, assemblies, and reference sequences across complex computational pipelines.

Polars is a lightning-fast DataFrame library built for Python and Rust, leveraging Apache Arrow. It provides an expression-based API and lazy evaluation framework for highly efficient data manipulation. It is ideal for complex data pipelines, large-scale ETL tasks, and migrating from Pandas due to its superior performance, parallel execution capabilities, and optimized query planning.

A comprehensive guide for authors submitting academic papers, detailing how to proactively provide reproducible code, datasets, and experimental scripts. This ensures that research results are verifiable and trustworthy, significantly enhancing the credibility of findings in high-tier journals despite the absence of formal artifact evaluation badges.

This guide details the best practices for preparing and submitting supplementary materials for CSCW submissions. It clarifies the difference between main papers, appendices, and separate files, emphasizing that anything needed to *trust* the method belongs here. Crucially, it provides deep guidelines on data anonymization, metadata scrubbing, and version control for review rounds.

This guide details best practices for enhancing the credibility of academic manuscripts submitted to scholarly journals, particularly addressing code and data availability. It teaches authors how to proactively provide stable links, checksums, comprehensive reproducibility scripts, and clear licensing statements. The focus is on bolstering trustworthiness for single-blind review processes, even when the journal does not mandate formal artifact badges.

A comprehensive guide for researchers designing and auditing empirical evaluations for data mining papers (e.g., ICDM). It teaches how to structure a trustworthy evaluation by defining operational tasks, conducting ablation studies to isolate mechanisms, proving scalability, and implementing known-truth checks to ensure findings are valid and not mere artifacts.

This comprehensive guide assists users in analyzing and reporting data for high-impact academic journals, specifically following the rigorous standards of the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR). It covers advanced statistical process evidence (mediation, moderation, effect sizes) for behavioral experiments, as well as methods for establishing trustworthiness in interpretive (CCT) research. It emphasizes transparency, replication code, and adherence to modern research reporting mandates.

Provides comprehensive guidelines for meeting modern academic publishing standards, particularly those required by educational psychology journals. It outlines mandatory requirements for ensuring research reproducibility, including depositing data, materials, and analysis code in trusted repositories with persistent identifiers (DOIs), adhering to JARS reporting standards, and documenting preregistration status.

This guide provides comprehensive standards for defending rigorous data analysis in academic submissions, particularly for the Journal of Management Studies (JMS). It details specific requirements for both quantitative work (e.g., robustness checks, SEM, endogeneity) and qualitative work (e.g., coding transparency, abductive logic, trustworthiness), ensuring the analysis credibly supports the theoretical claims.