skills/26-Data-Wise-scholar/skills/implementation/simulation-architect/SKILL.md
Design and implementation of comprehensive simulation studies
npx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research simulation-architectInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
You are an expert in designing Monte Carlo simulation studies for statistical methodology research.
The definitive guide for simulation study design requires five components:
| Component | Question | Documentation Required | |-----------|----------|----------------------| | Aims | What are we trying to learn? | Clear research questions | | Data-generating mechanisms | How do we create data? | Full DGP specification | | Estimands | What are we estimating? | Mathematical definition | | Methods | What estimators do we compare? | Complete algorithm description | | Performance measures | How do we evaluate? | Bias, variance, coverage |
□ Aims stated clearly
□ DGP fully specified (all parameters, distributions)
□ Estimand(s) defined mathematically
□ All methods described with sufficient detail for replication
□ Performance measures defined
□ Number of replications justified
□ Monte Carlo standard errors reported
□ Random seed documented for reproducibility
□ Software and version documented
□ Computational time reported
Monte Carlo Standard Error (MCSE) formula:
$$\text{MCSE}(\hat{\theta}) = \frac{\hat{\sigma}}{\sqrt{B}}$$
where $B$ is the number of replications and $\hat{\sigma}$ is the estimated standard deviation.
| Purpose | Minimum B | Recommended B | MCSE for proportion | |---------|-----------|---------------|---------------------| | Exploratory | 500 | 1,000 | ~1.4% at 95% coverage | | Publication | 1,000 | 2,000 | ~1.0% at 95% coverage | | Definitive | 5,000 | 10,000 | ~0.4% at 95% coverage | | Precision | 10,000+ | 50,000 | ~0.2% at 95% coverage |
# Calculate Monte Carlo standard errors
calculate_mcse <- function(estimates, coverage_indicators = NULL) {
B <- length(estimates)
list(
# MCSE for mean (bias)
mcse_mean = sd(estimates) / sqrt(B),
# MCSE for standard deviation
mcse_sd = sd(estimates) / sqrt(2 * (B - 1)),
# MCSE for coverage (proportion)
mcse_coverage = if (!is.null(coverage_indicators)) {
p <- mean(coverage_indicators)
sqrt(p * (1 - p) / B)
} else NA
)
}
# Rule of thumb: B needed for desired MCSE
replications_needed <- function(desired_mcse, estimated_sd) {
ceiling((estimated_sd / desired_mcse)^2)
}
# Full simulation study template following Morris et al. guidelines
run_simulation_study <- function(
n_sims = 2000,
n_vec = c(200, 500, 1000),
seed = 42,
parallel = TRUE,
n_cores = parallel::detectCores() - 1
) {
set.seed(seed)
# Define parameter grid
params <- expand.grid(
n = n_vec,
effect_size = c(0, 0.14, 0.39),
model_spec = c("correct", "misspecified")
)
# Setup parallel processing
if (parallel) {
cl <- parallel::makeCluster(n_cores)
doParallel::registerDoParallel(cl)
on.exit(parallel::stopCluster(cl))
}
# Run simulations
results <- foreach(
i = 1:nrow(params),
.combine = rbind,
.packages = c("tidyverse", "mediation")
) %dopar% {
scenario <- params[i, ]
sim_results <- replicate(n_sims, {
data <- generate_dgp(scenario)
estimates <- apply_methods(data)
evaluate_performance(estimates, truth = scenario$effect_size)
}, simplify = FALSE)
summarize_scenario(sim_results, scenario)
}
# Add MCSE
results <- add_monte_carlo_errors(results, n_sims)
results
}
# Summarize with MCSE
add_monte_carlo_errors <- function(results, B) {
results %>%
mutate(
mcse_bias = empirical_se / sqrt(B),
mcse_coverage = sqrt(coverage * (1 - coverage) / B),
mcse_rmse = rmse / sqrt(2 * B)
)
}
# Memory-efficient parallel simulation
run_parallel_simulation <- function(scenario, n_sims, n_cores = 4) {
library(future)
library(future.apply)
plan(multisession, workers = n_cores)
results <- future_replicate(n_sims, {
data <- generate_dgp(scenario$n, scenario$params)
est <- estimate_effect(data)
list(
estimate = est$point,
se = est$se,
covered = abs(est$point - scenario$truth) < 1.96 * est$se
)
}, simplify = FALSE)
plan(sequential) # Reset
# Aggregate
estimates <- sapply(results, `[[`, "estimate")
ses <- sapply(results, `[[`, "se")
covered <- sapply(results, `[[`, "covered")
list(
bias = mean(estimates) - scenario$truth,
empirical_se = sd(estimates),
mean_se = mean(ses),
coverage = mean(covered),
mcse_bias = sd(estimates) / sqrt(n_sims),
mcse_coverage = sqrt(mean(covered) * (1 - mean(covered)) / n_sims)
)
}
generate_mediation_data <- function(n, params) {
# Confounders
X <- rnorm(n)
# Treatment (binary)
ps <- plogis(params$gamma0 + params$gamma1 * X)
A <- rbinom(n, 1, ps)
# Mediator
M <- params$alpha0 + params$alpha1 * A + params$alpha2 * X +
rnorm(n, sd = params$sigma_m)
# Outcome
Y <- params$beta0 + params$beta1 * A + params$beta2 * M +
params$beta3 * X + params$beta4 * A * M +
rnorm(n, sd = params$sigma_y)
data.frame(Y = Y, A = A, M = M, X = X)
}
| Size | Label | Purpose | |------|-------|---------| | 100-200 | Small | Stress test | | 500 | Medium | Typical study | | 1000-2000 | Large | Asymptotic behavior | | 5000+ | Very large | Efficiency comparison |
| Effect | Interpretation | |--------|----------------| | 0 | Null (Type I error) | | 0.1 | Small | | 0.3 | Medium | | 0.5 | Large |
params <- expand.grid(
n = c(200, 500, 1000, 2000),
effect = c(0, 0.14, 0.39, 0.59), # Small/medium/large per Cohen
confounding = c(0, 0.3, 0.6),
misspecification = c(FALSE, TRUE)
)
| Metric | Formula | Target | MCSE Formula | |--------|---------|--------|--------------| | Bias | $\bar{\hat\psi} - \psi_0$ | ≈ 0 | $\sqrt{\text{Var}(\hat\psi)/n_{sim}}$ | | Empirical SE | $\text{SD}(\hat\psi)$ | — | Complex | | Average SE | $\bar{\widehat{SE}}$ | ≈ Emp SE | $\text{SD}(\widehat{SE})/\sqrt{n_{sim}}$ | | Coverage | $\frac{1}{n_{sim}}\sum I(\psi_0 \in CI)$ | ≈ 0.95 | $\sqrt{p(1-p)/n_{sim}}$ | | MSE | $\text{Bias}^2 + \text{Var}$ | Minimize | — | | Power | % rejecting $H_0$ | Context-dependent | $\sqrt{p(1-p)/n_{sim}}$ |
| Metric | Minimum | Recommended | |--------|---------|-------------| | Bias | 1000 | 2000 | | Coverage | 2000 | 5000 | | Power | 1000 | 2000 |
Always report MCSE for key metrics:
#' Run simulation study
#' @param scenario Parameter list for this scenario
#' @param n_rep Number of replications
#' @param seed Random seed
run_simulation <- function(scenario, n_rep = 2000, seed = 42) {
set.seed(seed)
results <- future_map(1:n_rep, function(i) {
# Generate data
data <- generate_data(scenario$n, scenario$params)
# Fit methods
fit1 <- method1(data)
fit2 <- method2(data)
# Extract estimates
tibble(
rep = i,
method = c("method1", "method2"),
estimate = c(fit1$est, fit2$est),
se = c(fit1$se, fit2$se),
ci_lower = estimate - 1.96 * se,
ci_upper = estimate + 1.96 * se
)
}, .options = furrr_options(seed = TRUE)) %>%
bind_rows()
# Summarize
results %>%
group_by(method) %>%
summarize(
bias = mean(estimate) - scenario$true_value,
emp_se = sd(estimate),
avg_se = mean(se),
coverage = mean(ci_lower <= scenario$true_value &
ci_upper >= scenario$true_value),
mse = bias^2 + emp_se^2,
.groups = "drop"
)
}
Table X: Simulation Results (n_rep = 2000)
Method 1 Method 2
n Bias SE Cov MSE Bias SE Cov MSE
-----------------------------------------------------------
200 0.02 0.15 0.94 0.023 0.01 0.12 0.95 0.014
500 0.01 0.09 0.95 0.008 0.00 0.08 0.95 0.006
1000 0.00 0.06 0.95 0.004 0.00 0.05 0.95 0.003
Note: Cov = 95% CI coverage. MCSE for coverage ≈ 0.005.
# Save results incrementally
if (i %% 100 == 0) {
saveRDS(results_so_far,
file = sprintf("checkpoint_%s_rep%d.rds", scenario_id, i))
}
sessionInfo())furrr_options(seed = TRUE) for paralleldevelopment
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
development
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
testing
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
data-ai
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.